From: "Linus Lüssing" <linus.luessing@web.de>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
Subject: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] A few questions on TVLV
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 10:25:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131020082506.GC13550@Linus-Debian> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2124 bytes --]
Hi,
I think I had posted some thoughts on the TVLV feature on the IRC
channel before with some suggestions for changes (e.g. moving the
TVLV feature from the individual packet types down to the common
batman header). And had tried to come up with examples for
features where TVLVs for batman broadcast packets could be useful
- which might have been potential, but not the most convincing,
not the most awesome features.
So now I have a feature which I would like to have / would like to
work on in the future [0], and I would like to know:
a) Whether it is possible to do that with the current TVLV
infrastructure without breaking compatibility.
I think it is, probably by announcing this capability via an OGM
TVLV and only activating this feature if all visible nodes support
it, right?
b) If it is possible without breaking compatibility, then this
could still cause quite some burdon for heterogeneous, multi party
controlled networks, because all nodes would need to
upgraded or older ones somehow blacklisted, right?
c) What is your estimation, would it be easy to pull the TVLV
feature down onto the common batman-header code-wise?
d) Would the ease or difficulty to implement it (c)) and the
benefits it would provide (a)+b)) justify including a patch
for a TVLV-per-batman-header in the first compat bump release?
e) The first compat bump patches were already submitted to net/,
so there actually wouldn't be much time left to do that, would
there?
Cheers, Linus
PS: I would also volunteer to work on moving the TVLV down to the
common batman header, but if the time frame to do that is too
short then I'd probably not be fast enough to do that.
[0]: Split Horizon with a tag (the tag would need a per batman bcast TVLV)
* A per hard-interface mechanism tries to automatically detect whether
the connectivity to all local link layer neighbors is both
transitive and symmetric.
* If so broadcast/multicast packets coming from that interface are
tagged with a unique ID (e.g. the lowest MAC address present on
that link)
* Such tagged packets are never forwarded onto the according link
again.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2013-10-20 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-20 8:25 Linus Lüssing [this message]
2013-10-20 10:26 ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] A few questions on TVLV Marek Lindner
2013-10-22 21:26 ` Linus Lüssing
2013-10-22 21:47 ` Linus Lüssing
2013-10-22 22:16 ` Marek Lindner
2013-10-22 22:04 ` Marek Lindner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131020082506.GC13550@Linus-Debian \
--to=linus.luessing@web.de \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox