Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] TT inconsistency problem (again)

[Antonio Quartulli <ordex@autistici.org>]

On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 12:09:02PM +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> Hello Marko,
> 
> thank you for reporting the issue and for the high quantity (and quality) of
> information you are giving us.
> 
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 10:46:27AM +0100, Marko Panger - AGB Lab wrote:
> > [root@gtam00119 ~]# batctl ping 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e
> > PING 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e (48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e) 20(48) bytes of data
> > Reply from host 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e timed out
> > Reply from host 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e timed out
> > Reply from host 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e timed out
> > Reply from host 48:5d:60:b8:a3:0e timed out
> 
> Starting from this point I would say that the problem is "before" the TT
> mechanism. batctl ping do not relies on the TTs as it directly use originator
> (node) addresses. Usually, in this cases, the problem is in the connection
> between nodes (most likely on the layer below).
> 
> > 
> > And this is the output from 'batctl ll tt routes' from he node that is 
> > being pinged (see above):
> > 
> 
> [CUT]
> 
> From the log it is possible to see that the node is not receiving any TT_REPLY
> message (which should solve the inconsistency being reported). This suggests us
> that the previous statement is probably true ("the problem is 'before" the TT
> mechanism").
> 
> 
> Would you mind providing us the output of "batctl o" after the reboot on the
> node where you take the tt log?
> Moreover, could you please attach the output of "batctl td WIFI_IFACE" either on
> the unreachable node and on another one (maybe a2:f6?)

I was wondering whether you can directly provide us two .cap file (I think they
are easier to inspect than looking at the batctl td output into an email :-))

Cheers,

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> -- 
> Antonio Quartulli
> 
> ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
> Ernesto "Che" Guevara

-- 
Antonio Quartulli

..each of us alone is worth nothing..
Ernesto "Che" Guevara