[Olsr-dev] OLSR IPs for node with multiple interfaces

[Markus Kittenberger]

in my opinion the real problem ist NOT which network masks you want to
configure,..

but using two wireless interfaces on the same channel may make problems,..
why do you want to do this??

and using different subnets will surely
not stop all possible problems of this,..

lg Markus

On 4/30/08, Axel Neumann <(spam-protected)> wrote:
>
> On Mittwoch 30 April 2008, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > On Mit, 2008-04-30 at 14:11 +0200, Henning Rogge wrote:
> > > Am Mittwoch 30 April 2008 13:36:45 schrieben Sie:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > Am Mittwoch 30 April 2008 13:07:16 schrieb Axel Neumann:
> > > > > For older olsrd versions there has been the "recommendation" to
> > > > > always use a different netmask for each olsr interface of a node.
> >
> > Are you sure? I can't remember such a thing (or anything in that
> > direction).
>
>
> I guess my information is mostly based on gossip. Thats why I am trying to
> clarify now. There was at least a reply to a similar question on this
> mailing
> list last year:
> http://lists.olsr.org/pipermail/olsr-dev/2007-September/001280.html
>
> I understood the response as: better dont do it!


gossip (-;

> >
> > In the cable world, both interfaces may be in the same broadcast domain
> > (e.g. connected to the same switch, no VLANs or similar).
> > Thus the above should work with any (reasonable) OS/device/IP-Stack.
> >
> > > The kernel has a packet which has to be transfered to a node called
> > > 10.0.0.3. How should the kernel determine what interface is to use ?
> >
> > The kernel can use either one as there are routes etc.
> >
> > What am I missing in this thread (apart from the fact that I ignored the
> > WLAN part and aspects. But from a pure layer 3 point of view, it should
> > work)?
>
>
> This is the point. In a Wireless world, the kernel can not use either one
> because only one of the two wireless ad-hoc interfaces may have a proper
> working link.


you mix up things, even in a cabled mesh, it using either one won`t
work,.. because the next node will take "another" one, and sooner or
later a loop is achieved,..

but this is no problem in olsrd points of view, which creates hostroutes to
every other node,..

>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.olsr.org/pipermail/olsr-dev/attachments/20080430/626af79b/attachment.html>