Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] B.A.T.M.A.N Digest, Vol 79, Issue 1

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] B.A.T.M.A.N Digest, Vol 79, Issue 1

[ajeet singh]

> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:25:31 +0200
> From: Antonio Quartulli <ordex@autistici.org>
> To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
>         <b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] ttcrc value
> Message-ID: <20130702072531.GA2325@ritirata.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 11:28:48AM +0530, ajeet singh wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> We are getting the same value of ttcrc always even after restarting the nodes.
>>
>> Please check the bellow TCPDUMP log,
>>
>> Log 1
>> 09:05:17.118462 BAT f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0, seq 2246235905, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl
>> 50, v 14, flags [...F.], length 26
>> 09:05:17.118764 BAT f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0, seq 2246235905, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl
>> 50, v 14, flags [...F.], length 26
>>
>> Log 2 ( After restart)
>>  00:12:29.480397 BAT f6:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> aa:aa:03:00:00:00, seq 2864163091, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl
>> 2, v 14, flags [.....], length 26
>>  00:12:29.520254 BAT f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> aa:aa:03:00:00:00, seq 31648486, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl 50,
>> v 14, flags [...F.], length 26
>>  00:12:32.488390 BAT f6:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> aa:aa:03:00:00:00, seq 2864163092, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl
>> 2, v 14, flags [.....], length 26
>>  00:12:32.536432 BAT f4:7b:5e:88:7d:a0: OGM IV via neigh
>> aa:aa:03:00:00:00, seq 31648487, tq 255, ttvn 1, ttcrc 15939, ttl 50,
>> v 14, flags [...F.], length 26
>>
>>
>>  Is it normal operation?
>
> The TTCRC is computed based _only_ on the address addresses listed in the local
> table. There is no randomness involved, therefore, if the addresses in the table
> are always the same, then also the TTCRC will stay the same.
>
> Is this the case?
>
> cheers,
>
> --
> Antonio Quartulli
>
> ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
> Ernesto "Che" Guevara
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 836 bytes
> Desc: Digital signature
> URL: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n/attachments/20130702/42977597/attachment-0001.sig>
>
Hello Antonio,

Thanks for reply.
I have fixed the MAC for bat0, so I am getting same ttcrc after every reboot.

Thanks
Ajeet

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] B.A.T.M.A.N Digest, Vol 79, Issue 1

[Antonio Quartulli]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1085 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 10:43:05AM +0530, ajeet singh wrote:
> >>
> >>  Is it normal operation?
> >
> > The TTCRC is computed based _only_ on the address addresses listed in the local
> > table. There is no randomness involved, therefore, if the addresses in the table
> > are always the same, then also the TTCRC will stay the same.
> >
> > Is this the case?
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > --
> > Antonio Quartulli
> >
> > ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
> > Ernesto "Che" Guevara
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> > Name: signature.asc
> > Type: application/pgp-signature
> > Size: 836 bytes
> > Desc: Digital signature
> > URL: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n/attachments/20130702/42977597/attachment-0001.sig>
> >
> Hello Antonio,
> 
> Thanks for reply.
> I have fixed the MAC for bat0, so I am getting same ttcrc after every reboot.
> 

Then everything is perfectly normal.

Cheers,


-- 
Antonio Quartulli

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

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]