Hmm, I've been using picoM and nanoM-loco devices with ath9K in openWRT, and I admit I've never sniffed a packet to see if it's actually encrypted, but it doesn't yell at me when I set encryption to psk2, and all the devices talk happily. <br>
<br>As far as diminishing returns, you're only upping the data rate by a factor of 4 or so with 100Mbps links. I can't imagine that's enough to render an otherwise fairly robust encryption useless. <br><br>
~Keith<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Ben West <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:me@benwest.name">me@benwest.name</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi Keith,<div><br></div><div>My present firmware stack (OpenWRT + ath9k in mesh mode) appears to support no layer2 encryption for Nano M5 radios I'm using, i.e. WPA-NONE, WPA, WEP. I'd love to be wrong about that. Madwifi might do it, but then I'd lose nice features of the radio like HT modes.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Also, other responders on this thread mentioned diminishing returns in using even WPA2 (?) for 100Mbs+ links, since you reduce the time required for cracking the key, IIRC.<div><div></div><div class="h5">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Keith Berkoben <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:berkoben@gmail.com" target="_blank">berkoben@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Why would WPA not work? (assumes you have control of all the nodes in the network to set the keys)<br><font color="#888888"><br>~Keith<br><br></font><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div></div><div>On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Ben West <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:me@benwest.name" target="_blank">me@benwest.name</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div>Hi Saverio,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the references to tinc.</div>
<div><br></div><div>
Going on the assumption that one still wouldn't want to run tinc on access point itself (whose CPUs run at 180MHz or 400MHz), and that the end-user wouldn't run tinc on their desktop, do you have experience running tinc on a dedicated box at the mesh's edge, with the other end of the tinc tunnel terminating at whatever box manages your mesh's wired uplink(s)?</div>
<div><br></div><div>For example, a scenario I see: a subscriber to my 5GHz adhoc mesh wants to use a credit card reader, which has a 10baseT port. Although my mesh's routing plane is somewhat secured using olsr_secure plugin, the actual traffic is not encrypted due to lack of WEP/WPA/etc, and the reader would furthermore be sending card numbers (possibly in plaintext!) over that link.</div>
<div><br></div><div>My mesh's wired uplink is managed by a Mikrotik board, 400MHz CPU / 64MB RAM, running OpenWRT for QoS, but no radio or OLSR. Assuming this board has adequate CPU/RAM bandwidth spare to terminate one (or preferably several) tinc tunnels thru the mesh, could I secure the reader's link with a ~50$US box with 32MB RAM running OpenWRT+tinc, sitting between the reader's LAN port and its mesh access point?</div>
<div><br></div><div>That is, something like this:</div><div><a href="http://www.bizsyscon.com/product/MIKROTIK__+RB450__5038.html" target="_blank">http://www.bizsyscon.com/product/MIKROTIK__+RB450__5038.html</a></div><div>
<br></div><div>
Or even a WRT54GL running OpenWRT under 16MB RAM and 180MHz CPU?</div><div><br></div><div>Are there effective minimum hardware requirements for tinc? The credit card traffic in this example would be very small (e.g. <100kbs), but it would be latency sensitive.</div>
<div><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:49 AM, ZioPRoTo (Saverio Proto) <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:zioproto@gmail.com" target="_blank">zioproto@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>> limited encryption is supported for adhoc/mesh modes, I'm curious if anyone<br>
> on the list has good experience using OpenVPN with OpenWRT meshes? I'm<br>
<br>
</div>we do not use tunnels on the mesh itself, however to convey traffic<br>
from the edge of the mesh towards our central server where the NAT to<br>
the actual Internet is done, we use tinc-vpn<br>
<br>
we like much more tinc than openvpn on embedded devices<br>
<br>
<a href="http://tinc-vpn.org/" target="_blank">http://tinc-vpn.org/</a><br>
<a href="http://wiki.ninux.org/TincVPN" target="_blank">http://wiki.ninux.org/TincVPN</a><br>
<br>
regards<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Saverio<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div>Ben West</div><div><a href="mailto:me@benwest.name" target="_blank">me@benwest.name</a></div><br>
</div>
<br></div></div><div>--<br>
Olsr-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Olsr-users@lists.olsr.org" target="_blank">Olsr-users@lists.olsr.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.olsr.org/mailman/listinfo/olsr-users" target="_blank">http://lists.olsr.org/mailman/listinfo/olsr-users</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br></div></div>-- <br><div class="im"><div>Ben West</div><div><a href="mailto:me@benwest.name" target="_blank">me@benwest.name</a></div><br>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>