From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 15:04:57 +0200 From: Antonio Quartulli Message-ID: <20121012130457.GA4566@ritirata.org> References: <507798EE.80305@codigosur.org> <50779CA3.9070208@yahoo.de> <5077A77B.3040803@altermundi.net> <20121012071559.GB2564@ritirata.org> <5078131D.9070508@altermundi.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5078131D.9070508@altermundi.net> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batman-adv: ap mode with isolation enabled 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: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 09:54:53AM -0300, NicoEch=C3=A1niz wrote: > On 10/12/12 04:15, Antonio Quartulli wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 02:15:39 -0300, NicoEch=C3=A1niz wrote: > >> > >> Is the setup clear enough now? or am I missing the point as to what is > >> unclear? Please ask whatever needs to be clarified. > >> > >=20 > > Hello Nicol=C3=A1s, > >=20 > > I think I got your point. First, you are talking about the "normal" AP = isolation > > feature that you can enable in hostapd, right? Because in batman-adv we= have our > > own (Distributed) AP-isolation but it has different effects and behavio= urs. >=20 > exactly, it is the "normal" AP isolation feature. >=20 >=20 > > The behaviour is correct: OGMs are broadcast packets. In infrastructure= mode, > > whatever broadcast packet a station sends gets to the AP which will re-= broadcast > > it again. In this way every station gets it and from the batman-adv poi= nt of > > view it is like the packet was received directly from the other sta (th= e MAC > > addresses in the packet say so). Therefore you must enable ap-isolation= in > > hostapd if you want batman-adv to behave as you expect. >=20 > Does this mean that with isolation turned off stations will try to > communincate directly if they can? Say, if we have two stations that are > far from the AP but very near each other, will they actually send > (unicast) packets to each other without going through the AP at all? If > so, activating isolation might be eliminating real possible paths, all > for the sake of sane originator tables. First, this is not related to batman-adv. We are discussing something "belo= w" the batman-adv layer. In infrastructure mode unicast packet from station A = to station B will pass through the AP. This behaviour has been changed by 802.= 11e and (T)DLS (you can have a look at the 802.11 standard if you want more det= ails about that). But, again, this is not related to batman-adv. If you use infrastructure mode without AP isolation, batman-adv will consid= er all the other STAs as direct neighbours. But, due to infrastructure mode, packets from STA1 to STA2 will always pass through the AP. This is also why= I would suggest to keep AP-isolation ON if you want to run batman-adv on the stations and on the AP, but then it depends on what you want to get. >=20 >=20 > I believe our mixed setup is not standard practice, that's why I wanted > to share this real-world results. not standard, but common (there are many -closed- drivers that work better = in infrastructure than adhoc mode. but this is normally used in PtP links only= due to asymmetry problems on the link (see 802.11 standard for more :-)) Cheers! --=20 Antonio Quartulli =2E.each of us alone is worth nothing.. Ernesto "Che" Guevara --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlB4FXkACgkQpGgxIkP9cwcqqwCghrch5unEl/wzXfW1X2LP98iZ x9oAn2LLBfeBe/Lm1NR4ABYIoE26AVZv =2o6n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH--