From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Marek Lindner Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 18:02:39 +0800 References: <4F4F6D18.3070403@ninux.org> <201203091742.56498.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201203091802.39790.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [Battlemesh] Battlemesh v5 tests Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org, Battle of the Mesh Mailing List On Friday, March 09, 2012 17:56:17 Benjamin Henrion wrote: > > Since this question keeps coming up and also seems to be the reason for > > the confusion, let me make it clear once more: There is no special > > protocol treatment in any way. No added cost, no protocol change, no > > magic commandline switches, etc. It simply is not necessary! > > > > This concept is so plain simple that everybody keeps wondering what we > > are hiding. You are looking for something that is not there. > > So on which interface the packet is gonna be transmitted? Hopefully the optimum interface. :-) Sorry, but your question is too broad to give a meaningful answer. Regards, Marek