[Olsr-dev] Feature Request : OLSRd2 sets routes after de-synchronisation

[Waeber Gilles]

Hi,

"... shall the routing agent just try once to "reinstall" the route and then forget about it?"
--> I would suggest that OLSRd2 tries to reinstall the route everytime it detects that the route is missing.

"... is this useful for everyone or would we annoy people because the routing agent just reverse what they did (maybe on purpose ;) )."
--> I agree, some people will be annoyed with this change of behaviour. To avoid disturbing people, the modification of the "route (re-)install" behaviour could be enable by a config parameter instead of modifying the default behaviour of OLSRd2.

Gilles

-----Original Message-----
From: Henning Rogge <(spam-protected)> 
Sent: dimanche, 20 mai 2018 19:58
To: Waeber Gilles <(spam-protected)>
Cc: olsr-dev <(spam-protected)>
Subject: Re: [Olsr-dev] Feature Request : OLSRd2 sets routes after de-synchronisation

Hi...

I would like to get more feedback from other people on this feature request...


On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 1:03 PM Waeber Gilles <(spam-protected)> wrote:

> Hi everyone,

> We are currently at the engineering school of Fribourg (Switzerland)
implementing machine learning algorithms to improve the OLSR protocol we use in a MANET network.

> When our machine learning algorithm removes some OLSR learned routes 
> from the routing table, we noticed that this creates a de-synchronization between OLSRd2’s internal view of the routing table and the real one. (
https://github.com/OLSR/OONF/issues/16)

Yes, that have been the default behavior for OLSR and OLSRv2 for a long time (at least for the olsr.org implementations).

> We would like to request a new feature, which would allow OLSRd2 to 
> add and updates routes even when OLSRd2’s routing table is de-synchronized.

The interesting question is not only to detect that the route is missing, but also reacting well to conditions when you just cannot set them again...
shall the routing agent just try once to "reinstall" the route and then forget about it?

> Is this something that could be useful to other people ?

This is an interesting question... is this useful for everyone or would we annoy people because the routing agent just reverse what they did (maybe on purpose ;) ).

> Who could implement it ?

In theory everyone could do it... the code to react to routing changes is already there, the layer2_import plugin is using it (as an example). In practice it looks like I am the only one working on the codebase at the moment.

Henning