From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4F0C39BE.3000209@inti.gob.ar> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 10:14:38 -0300 From: gtolon@inti.gob.ar MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] problem with mesh network 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 Hi Marek, thanks for the reply. El 10/01/2012 08:00 a.m., b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org escribi= =F3: > Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 20:22:37 +0800 > From: Marek Lindner > To: "The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking" > > Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] problem with mesh network > Message-ID:<201201092022.37637.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> > Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1" > > > Hi, > >> > We are using batman-adv 2011.2.0 with Openwrt Backfire-rc6 on D-Link >> > Dir-615 routers (2 Antennas, 1 single radio), each router with an adh= oc >> > interface managed by batman-adv for the mesh network and an Acces Poi= nt >> > interface bridged with bat0 and ethernet to allow non batman-adv clie= nts >> > to connect. The problem is that sometimes all works fine, but sometim= es >> > we get very poor bitrates between routers, even using just two router= s, >> > testing with iperf. We don't know where the problem is, specially >> > because it's a very erratic behavior. If any of you have used this >> > configuration with openwrt and ath9k driver we'd really appreciate so= me >> > help. > this does not sound like a batman issue. Did you try contacting the > ath9k/linux-wireless/openwrt developers ? Yes, we suspected it could be a TX dma problem, because occasionally we=20 found that error in the logs, so we followed some openwrt tickets=20 related with that, but we're not sure that's the problem, and anyway it=20 has not been solved yet. We've also asked on ath9k list about the driver=20 debug files in case we could find something there, but they did't=20 answered, I guess it's hard to explain in a mail list. We haven't asked=20 to linux-wireless, maybe it would be better, since it could be something=20 on top of the driver. > >> > By the way, the D-Link Dir-615 is an n router, but for some reason >> > related with hostapd the ap vif gets configured in g mode, and the ad= hoc >> > in n mode, no matter what we set in the uci files. So in case the >> > problem were related with the adhoc and ap virtual interface, we were >> > thinking about the possibility of setting the mesh network without us= ing >> > adhoc mode. In that case each router should have one ap for non >> > batman-adv clients, and two additional interfaces, one in ap and the >> > other managed, these two used to connect with other routers via >> > batman-adv, would that be correct? In that case, you think this >> > configuration could be more or less stable than the other using adhoc >> > mode? > batman-adv does not care how you configure your interfaces. Using managed= /AP > with batman-adv on top works as well. However, you will need to configure= each > managed/AP setup manually which will be cumbersome in a larger network an= d has > no failover. A single failure in your managed/AP chain will bring down all > nodes depending on it. We were thinking in a script that managed the stations to connect to the=20 different APs to avoid configuring each router manually. However we=20 realized that with just one managed interface, each router could connect=20 to only one AP, so if we wanted that every router could connect=20 bidirectionally to others we should use a number of managed interfaces=20 enough to connect to all neigbours, shouldn't we? In any case it would be just another test to see if the results are=20 different. Gabriel