From: Michael Rack <michael.rack@rsm-freilassing.de>
To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.net>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Problems with Gateway-Selection without option -g
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2009 19:13:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AA3EDCD.1090704@rsm-freilassing.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200909062311.22521.lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
Am 06.09.2009 17:11, schrieb Marek Lindner:
>
>
> I don't understand why you have the feeling the gate0 interface is a problem.
> As Elektra explained choosing a default gateway by "inserting a default route"
> is meaningless (in a mesh). If each client should be able to choose its own
> gateway there is no way around the tunnel mechanism.
>
Sorry but i had not the right view of the tunneling-interface.
Now, the reason for the tunneling-interface is totaly clear. There is no
other solution to route internet-traffic through a specified gatway. The
only solution will be to lable a tcp/ip-packet how MPLS does, but that
is to fancy.
One question: Will the P2P-Interface (gate0) shows up in a traceroute?
The P2P-Interface have a private ip-address 169.x.x.x assigned to it. I
use only public ip-addresses and do not want to show a private
ip-address in a traceroute.
When using the tunneling interface, the MTU is set to a lower value then
1500 bytes (1431 bytes). B.A.T.M.A.N have in addition to the NAT-Helper
set the TCPMSS Flag to something like 1371 bytes (1431 bytes - 20 Bytes
of MAC-Address and - 40 Bytes of TCP/IP Header). I found nothing about
TCPMSS on my firewall-rules (iptables) in the table "mangle".
Without TCPMSS, packages that transport more then 1371 bytes will be
silently dropped in my case.
Now i will give B.A.T.M.A.N a second try and will use the little tricky
solution to add two /1 subnets. Thanks to Elektra.
> I suggest to use the --policy-routing-script [1] option to modify the routing
> tables on the fly.
Currently i have my own policy-routing-script, because B.A.T.M.A.N does
not support HOST-Routes xxx.205.12.4/32. But why does B.A.T.M.A.N not
fully support Host-Routes? A mash with only Host-Addresses is easier to
administrate then complete networks. A second goal is, that the ad-hoc
mobile user is free to change his position across the net.
I use only host-addresses to safe ip-addresses.
Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-06 17:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-06 5:28 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Problems with Gateway-Selection without option -g Michael Rack
2009-09-06 10:50 ` elektra
2009-09-06 11:33 ` Michael Rack
2009-09-06 12:37 ` elektra
2009-09-06 15:11 ` Marek Lindner
2009-09-06 17:13 ` Michael Rack [this message]
2009-09-06 17:47 ` Marek Lindner
2009-09-07 10:16 ` Michael Rack
2009-09-07 13:02 ` Marek Lindner
2009-09-07 13:40 ` Michael Rack
2009-09-08 17:57 ` Marek Lindner
2009-10-30 10:19 ` Michael Rack
2009-10-30 12:11 ` elektra
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=4AA3EDCD.1090704@rsm-freilassing.de \
--to=michael.rack@rsm-freilassing.de \
--cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.net \
/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