[lime-users] setting one mesh device as gateway? (and nanostation M2 update)

Nicolas Pace nico at libre.ws
Wed May 10 13:25:57 UTC 2017


On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 14:20 +0200, Nikksno via lime-users wrote:
> Hi again!
> 
> Sorry, I'm really not an expert at all on these complex configs,
> sorry if it wasn't clear.

Not at all. You were comprenhensive before... I felt it too technical,
that's all (wanted to understand what you were trying to accomplish to
help you besides the specific strategy you choosed).

> The goal is to have 5 ports to connect:
> 
> 1] one ISP router for Internet connection [wan mode]
> 2] four other mesh nodes via ethernet [mesh mode]
> 
> With the existing default setup, if I connect two mesh routers wan to
> wan, they mesh perfectly, and both bmx6 and batman show the other
> router as going via the eth0 interface instead of the wlan mesh
> interface.
> 
> But I need more ports, so instead of using an outside switch and only
> use the first router's wan port [eth0] why not change the behavior of
> the Lan ports [eth1] and make all of them wan plus mesh ports? That's
> the goal here.

I didn't expected the wan-to-wan coonection to work!!!
Besides that, the standard way if doing what I feel you want to do is
by connecting then lan-to-lan. That's the default behaviour.


> If I use the eth1 of the first router to mesh with other routers as
> you're suggesting, the problem is that the meshing doesn't seem to
> happen correctly, as bmx6 shows the second router's route as being
> eth1, but batman shows all routes to other nodes being over wlan
> mesh, even to the second router.

The switch lan (eth1) and two networks that belong to the two radios
should be both part of the same br-lan interface, so they work as a
single 'switch', and bmx6 and batman-adv must see them as peers (I
think bmx6 will show them as originators, and batman-adv as nodes).

> Additionally, even if Lan to wan mesh were to work, how would I be
> certain that all meshing components would recognize that, and that
> the second router would not, say, think of the first router as a
> traditional [non mesh] router, like an ISP one, and interpret it as a
> gateway for instance?

You disipate all those doubts by using only the LAN ports. That's the
way to get what you want to do.


> That's why I wanted to make the 4 eth1 ports not output the "Lan"
> interface, but the "wan" + "mesh" interfaces, like the single eth0
> port.

The general understanding is that WAN means 'to have access to
internet'. The WAN port should only be used for that, and the LAN ports
meaning 'to interconnect nodes or clients' should only be used for
that.

> I'd like to so this from chef, in order to have a ready to deploy
> image for the first router with this modification. However I've been
> doing some tests from luci, I've disabled the eth1 ports from the Lan
> interface bridge [leaving the other 3 active], and changing some
> other stuff but I've tried changing some files but with no success.

I would suggest you to try a firmware from scratch and use it as
explained before:
* LAN ports for the interconnection of nodes and clients
* WAN ports for the connnection to Internet.

Let us know if that's clear for you,

Regards,

> 
> I hope this makes it more clear.
> 
> Thank you and sorry for the confusion.
> 
> Nk
> 
> From: Nicolas Pace <nico at libre.ws>
> Sent: May 10, 2017 12:48
> To: libremesh users
> Subject: Re: [lime-users] setting one mesh device as gateway? (and
> nanostation M2 update)
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 09:36 +0200, nk at os.vu wrote: > Thank you
> Nicolas! > > I've noticed there's some meshing going on in the lan
> ports already > by default, but if I chain a lan port of the router
> to the wan of > another one, bmx6 seems to figure out something is
> going on on eth1, > but BATMAN keeps all routes to other nodes via
> WiFi, even to the one > that it has an ethernet connection to.
> Indeed! The firmware is designed to allow LAN ports to be connected
> in a daisy- chain setup, so you can connect as many nodes as you want
> via the lan ports, and they will behave as a giant switch. > Also, of
> course, lan ports have the lan interface installed, whereas > I'd
> like to completely disable it from chef, making the LAN of that >
> router only accessible via WiFi. > > In other words, I'd like the
> exact same config to happen on eth1 as > eth0. The reason is I want
> to do ethernet mesh with up to 4 other > routers without needing an
> external switch, connecting to the single > wan port, instead using
> the built in hardware switch in eth1 that is > already part of the
> router, but with the same behavior of the single > wan port instead
> as being a Lan. > > Basically on the change network behavior webpage
> p4u wrote [I think] > I've learned that lime-hdw-openwrt-wan is
> autoinstalled on multiport > routers, I've tried replicating it for
> Linux_name "eth1" and changing > the default interface "eth0" I've
> found inside lime-defaults to > "eth1" in /etc/config/lime. But
> nothing changed at all, even in > Network > Interfaces. Also I see
> that by default there are eth0_13 > and eth0_29 but only one of those
> two in eth1 [can't remember of 13 > or 29]. Is the correct way to
> copy the lime-hdw-openwrt-wan to > another one named differently and
> Linux name set to eth1? Chef says > not to alter interface specific
> configuration inside lime defaults, > so where should I do that in
> chef? Should I add a new file?  > > Also, I'm looking for the
> cleanest possible way to do this, to ensure > I don't mess up all of
> the extremely complex interface configuration > of LiMe ;] This is my
> second ask for clarification, perhaps I'm too sleepy now to
> understand it, but, Could you share with us the use-case for this? I
> mean, can you describe what you are trying to accomplish without the
> technical language, like if you were describing it to ... a non-geek
> friend? :) At least from my side I need more info :) > > Thank you >
> > Nk > From: Nicolas Pace > Sent: May 10, 2017 04:58 > To: Nk;
> libremesh users > Subject: Re: [lime-users] setting one mesh device
> as gateway? (and > nanostation M2 update) > > On Tue, 2017-05-09 at
> 23:42 +0200, Nk via lime-users wrote: > Hi all > > > Sorry to
> resurrect and slightly hijack an old thread but I was > > wondering
> how I could get a multi port router [TL WR 1043 ND] to use > > all 5
> ports [1 wan + 4 lan] as if they were all wan ports, with > both >
> wan and mesh functionality on each and every one of them. In > other
> > words, I’d like to entirely disable the lan interface on > ethernet
> > [leaving it only on wifi] and instead assign the 4 lan > ports to >
> perform exactly the same function as the wan port out-of- > the-box.
> > I need to use one cable that goes to ISP router and have 4 > more
> ports > available to mesh via ethernet with other routers. this > is
> the default behaviour. > I’ve played around with /etc/config/lime, >
> /etc/config/network and > luci [just to get my hands dirty before >
> asking] but I don’t > understand the cleanest and most effective way
> > to do this. Can you share a little bit more of what you
> accomplished > so far? > Thank you so much in advance and sorry for
> all of the > questions > lately ;] your questions may be everyone's
> questions, by > you asking everyone learns! So, don't hesitate
> asking, do it!! :} > > On Mar 29, 2017, 6:18 PM +0200, Pau , wrote: >
> > If the name is wan > watchping should make the work. > > > > You
> can check the system log > with "logread | grep watchping". You > >
> can > > see if the daemon is > running "ps | grep watchping". And you
> can > > restart > > it > manually "/etc/init.d/watchping restart". If
> the node has > > > Internet > > and watchping detects it, a new
> "tunIn" rule named inet4 > is added > > to > > bmx6 in order to
> publish the Internet to other > nodes (you can check > > it > > with
> bmx6 -cp). > > > > On 29/03/17 > 18:13, James Lewis wrote: > > > > If
> the virtual network device is > named "wan", there is a daemon > > >
> > named > > > > "watchping" > which will detect the Internet
> connection, will > > > > publish it > > > > > and set up the proper
> NAT rules. > > >   > > > My interface was > definitely called wan,
> but this definitely > > > didn't > > > happen > until I manually
> added the iptables rules > > > > > > Anything else > to test? Does
> this daemon need restart or something > > > if > > > > interface
> setup changes? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > J > > > > > > > > This
> is the recommended way, but if you do it manually > > > > >
> configuring > > > > network from OpenWRT (instead of using lime- >
> config) then you > > > > must be > > > > sure that you are using >
> "wan" as interface name and not > > > > something like > > > > "wwan"
> > or "wan2". > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > James > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] (obviously with interface names >
> changed) > > > > > > iptables -A FORWARD -i wlan1 -o wlan0 -j ACCEPT
> > > > > > > > iptables -A FORWARD -i wlan0 -o wlan1 -m state --state
> > > > > > > > ESTABLISHED,RELATED \ > > > > > > -j ACCEPT > > > > > >
> > iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o wlan0 -j MASQUERADE > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Pau wrote: > > > > > > >
> On > 28/03/17 18:54, Ilario Gelmetti wrote: > > > > > > > > On
> 03/28/2017 > 06:41 PM, James Lewis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On
> 28/03/17 16:13, > James Lewis wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Now the
> quesiton is: how > do we set one of the > > > > > > > > > > > > mesh
> devices to _take_ > > > > > > > > > > > > > DHCP through the LAN port
> rather than give it, > > > > > > > > > > > > > and to be the
> 'gateway' > > > > > > > > > > > > > device on the mesh network, and
> then what will > > > > > > > > > > > > > happen with devices > > > >
> > > > > > > > > that subsequently > connect to the mesh? How will > >
> > > > > > > > > > > they get their > gateway > > > > > > > > > > > >
> set? > > > > > > > > > >   > > > > > > > > > > > There are two ways
> in your case: > > > > > > > > > > * > configuring LibreMesh for using
> that ethernet > > > > > > > > > > > port as WAN (as Pau is > > > > >
> > > > > > going to write in the > web); > > > > > > > > >   > > > > >
> > > > > Great, this is what we > thought and tried, but perhaps > > >
> > > > > > > got something wrong > > > > > > > > > > somewhere as it
> didn't work. Look forward to Pau's > > > > > > > > > > docs. > > > >
> > > >   > > > > > > > Let's see if it > helps you understand how it
> works. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http:/ >
> /libremesh.org/docs/changing_network_behavior.html > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Feel free to make comments and/or send modifications via
> > > > > > > > > pull-request. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We are
> working > on the LiMe Web interface and soon this > > > > > > > kind
> of > > > > > > > > configuration will be available via Web, but for
> the > > > > > > > > moment it is only > > > > > > > possible via
> shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you modify just the
> /etc/config/lime* files or > also > > > > > > > > the others? > > > >
> > > > > I have no idea if > this can be done also via the web-ui > >
> > > > > > > (I don't think > so). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> * otherwise just plugging > the cable from the > > > > > > > > > >
> gateway device into the > > > > > > > > > > > secondary port of
> Nanostation M2 (your model has 2 > > > > > > > > > > > ethernet
> ports, > > > > > > > > > > right?) > > > > > > > > > >   > > > > > >
> > > > No, I have the little M2 which only has > one ethernet > > > >
> > > > > > port. > > > > > > > >   > > > > > > > > > Ah ok! So it's a
> Ubiquiti NanoStation M2 LoCo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I do
> have eth0 and eth1 interfaces though > > > > > > > > >   > > > > > >
> > > For the LoCo XM model (as well for other models > with > > > > >
> > > > just 1 ethernet > > > > > > > > port) the > "bullet" image
> should be used [1]. For XW > > > > > > > > hardware > with one > > >
> > > > > > ethernet port (also stuff like newest > AirGrid models) > >
> > > > > > > there's a > > > > > > > > "loco-m-xw" > image. > > > > >
> > > > If you see two ethernet could be because you > used the > > > >
> > > > > "nano" image. > > > > > > > > I suppose that > there's no
> problem of having an unused > > > > > > > > eth1...? > > > > > > > >
> > Ciao! > > > > > > > > Ilario > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] 
> https://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/ubiquiti/airmaxm > > > > > > >   > > > >
> > > > > I think the eth1 controller exist but the physical port > > >
> > > > > > is just not > > > > > > > attached. > > > > >   > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ >
> > > > > > lime-users mailing list > > > > > lime- >
> users at lists.libremesh.org > > > > > https://lists.libremesh.org/mailm
>  > an/listinfo/lime-users > > > > > > > > >   > > > > -- > > > >
> ./p4u > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> _______________________________________________ > > > > > lime-users
> mailing list > > > > lime- > users at lists.libremesh.org > > > > https:
> //lists.libremesh.org/mailman > /listinfo/lime-users > > >   > > > >
> > > > >   > > -- > > ./p4u > > > > > > >
> _______________________________________________ > > lime-users >
> mailing list > > lime-users at lists.libremesh.org > > https://lists.lib
>  > remesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users > > >
> _______________________________________________ > lime-users mailing
> > list > lime-users at lists.libremesh.org > >
> https://lists.libremesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users >
> _______________________________________________ > lime-users mailing
> list > lime-users at lists.libremesh.org >
> https://lists.libremesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users
> _______________________________________________
> lime-users mailing list
> lime-users at lists.libremesh.org
> https://lists.libremesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.libremesh.org/pipermail/lime-users/attachments/20170510/9e11603f/attachment.sig>


More information about the lime-users mailing list