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

Nk nk at os.vu
Wed May 10 17:05:09 UTC 2017


That is awesome thank you! Yes I’ll have a working node within the next week I hope, if you hear from Gui or anyone else who was had experience with the C7s, please let me know, otherwise we won’t have AC working on the C7s, unless somehow using LEDE [assuming we figure out SDK] changes something.

The OM A60 is a dual band outdoor router, pretty cool, also 230€ though, and only one 2.4 interface. We’re looking to deliver the absolute best speeds possible with open source software [LiMe is our choice ;] Our node will have two 2.4GHz 3x3 MIMO interfaces [one for meshing] and one AC 5GHz interface for meshing [mesh interfaces with external antennas always].

I’m also thinking at this point we might be able to connect up to 2 WANs per node [as the wan ports will be free according to my latest mail and your confirmation] and have some kind of internet connection redundancy on every node!!! How cool would that be? I have no idea how LiMe chooses its gateway, if it pings the ISP router, if it pings a public IP, if it does a speedtest, so I don’t know if it would detect one of the two ISP routers being on and active but without a working internet connection [say due to an outage on one provider], or being slower, or having higher latency, and intelligently only use the other WAN as an exit route, or both in variable percentages according to their speeds and such, but this is a whole separate question/topic.

I’ll do some tests ;]

Thanks again!

On May 10, 2017, 7:03 PM +0200, Nicolas Pace <nico at libre.ws>, wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 18:45 +0200, Nk via lime-users wrote:
> > Fantastic thank you so much.
> >
> > Last question I promise: I’ve noticed in traceroute that when the
> > first router has wifi off and is ethernet meshing with the second
> > one, and I connect my laptop to the first router’s lan, like so:
> >
> > Laptop <client over eth> router 1 <mesh over eth> router 2 <mesh over
> > wifi> router 3 <client over eth> ISP router
> >
> > There is no extra “hop” in the trace route output. I assume this is
> > due to the layer 2 meshing, correct?
>
> Exactly!
>
> > However, is this exactly comparable, in terms of performance and
> > route selection, bandwidth, latency, and everything, in every way, to
> > router 1 meshing over wifi directly with router 3 without going
> > through router 2, provided 1 and 2 have the exact same wireless link
> > quality toward 3?
>
> Batman-adv calculate which of the links it has from router 1 to 3 is
> the best to send information through.
>
> > For instance, let’s say router 1 has a 5GHz AC interface, and router
> > 2 has a 2.4GHz interface. If this were a single dual-band router,
> > LiMe would automagically select the best wireless interface to mesh
> > with every other node on an individual basis,
>
> The best interface (wireless or wired)
>
> > if I understand correctly. Does this dual-router setup perfectly
> > replicate this behavior in your opinion, letting the C7 decide
> > whether to use its own faster but shorter range 5GHz interface or
> > whether to use the 2.4 interface of the 1043 just as if it were its
> > own, without being influenced by the fact there’s a hardware-level
> > "extra hop”? Or does it de-prioritize the 2.4 interface of the 1043
> > just because it’s one extra “hardware-level hop” away [please excuse
> > the terminology]?
>
> I believe batman-adv uses latency to determine which link it uses.
>
> > I’m asking this because I’m doing some hardware hacking to build what
> > we’re calling an openNODE, essentially a TL Archer C7 and a TL 1043
> > ND stuck together in a single package we’re making. It’s an
> > experiment to build a high performance dual band, triple-wifi-
> > interface node under 150€.
>
> Awesome. Do tell us how it works on the C7, and if you have those
> cheaper C3 to test on also!
>
> > [I’m simultaneously testing out lime-sdk to see if we can get an
> > open mesh A60 working, thanks to you ;]
>
> What's an open mesh A60 ?
>
> > The C7 will mesh over 5GHz [provided Gui enlightens us as to how to
> > get this working ;] and the 1043 will mesh over 2GHz. The only
> > wireless interface available to clients in AP mode will be the 2.4
> > secondary interface of the C7.
> >
> > If the two act exactly as one, we’re golden. If not, I have to
> > understand the cons in having two mesh routers instead of a single
> > dual-band mesh router per node.
>
> If they both use libremesh, then they act as one.
> There is nothing to do manually, except giving them meaningful names :)
>
> >
> > Thank you so much again!
> >
> > Nk
> >
> > On May 10, 2017, 6:31 PM +0200, Nicolas Pace <nico at libre.ws>, wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 15:50 +0200, Nk via lime-users wrote:
> > > > Ok sorry so just to confirm, the options then are
> > >
> > > > 1] WAN to WAN and
> > >
> > > There is no WAN-to-WAN between LibreMesh routers... this is an
> > > unexpected behaviour, but not desired nor recommended.
> > >
> > > > 2] LAN to LAN, and both routers can also have traditional LAN
> > > > clients
> > > > on the remaining 3 eth1 ports that receive DHCP as usual without
> > > > any
> > > > interference?
> > >
> > > Yes, this is the default and intended behaviour.
> > >
> > > > At this point my setup would be the one you can find attached. If
> > > > you confirm it works, I’ll test it out tonight. Thank you so
> > > > much.
> > >
> > > That is exactly the way you should use it!
> > >
> > > Awesome, tell us how it went!
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > > Nk
> > > >
> > > > On May 10, 2017, 3:37 PM +0200, Nicolas Pace <nico at libre.ws>,
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 15:34 +0200, Nk via lime-users wrote:
> > > > > > AHAHAHAH epic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Ilario, sorry to bother. My tests were first router’s
> > > > > > LAN
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > second router’s WAN, and that wasn’t working. Are you saying
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > should be connected LAN to LAN [as an alternative to WAN to
> > > > > > WAN
> > > > > > which
> > > > > > we know works perfectly]? Wouldn’t that cause a DHCP
> > > > > > conflict?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not at all. That is the default behaviour of LibreMesh (crazy,
> > > > > right?
> > > > > :) ).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nk
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On May 10, 2017, 3:33 PM +0200, Ilario Gelmetti <iochesonome@
> > > > > > gmai
> > > > > > l.co
> > > > > > m>, wrote:
> > > > > > > On 05/10/2017 02:20 PM, Nikksno via lime-users wrote:
> > > > > > > > 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.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's not lan, it's not wan...
> > > > > > > It's BATWAN nananananananananananananananana batwaaaaaannn
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No, seriously, I expected batman was present on ethernet
> > > > > > > LAN
> > > > > > > interfaces...
> > > > > > > They're also included in br-lan which is included in bat0,
> > > > > > > no?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can you post these?
> > > > > > > # brctl show
> > > > > > > # batctl if
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with nicopace, lan to lan should work.
> > > > > > > @devs pls? Are ethernet ports with LAN proto not used by
> > > > > > > batman-
> > > > > > > adv?
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lime-users mailing list
> > lime-users at lists.libremesh.org
> > https://lists.libremesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.libremesh.org/pipermail/lime-users/attachments/20170510/9d066502/attachment.html>


More information about the lime-users mailing list