From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ordex@autistici.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 12:11:03 +0100
From: Antonio Quartulli <ordex@autistici.org>
Message-ID: <20111206111102.GD4848@ritirata.org>
References: <4EDDE473.5020008@agblab.com> <20111206110826.GC4848@ritirata.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20111206110826.GC4848@ritirata.org>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] TT inconsistency problem (again)
Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/options/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n>
List-Post: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=subscribe>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking <b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.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