[Olsr-users] Routing-Problem | olsr.org - 0.6.0 | weight | etx_ff | mode ether
Henning Rogge
(spam-protected)
Fri Mar 30 11:36:15 CEST 2012
I think the weight was only used in hopcount metric. It has no meaning for ETX.
Henning Rogge
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:58, Markus Kittenberger
<(spam-protected)> wrote:
> i guess weight never changed the metric, it just gave the final decision
> between two routes of equal cost/hopcount. (but not toally sure never really
> used it)
>
> nearest equivalent is using lqmult, but it affects olsrd routing globally,
> not just local as the weight likely was doing it,.
>
> Markus
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Michael Rack
> <(spam-protected)> wrote:
>>
>> Yes it should change the metric for this route. But it does not.
>>
>> Here is a example how the routing looks like from txt_info-Plugin:
>>
>> VIEW IS FROM INTERNET-ROUTER as specified in my last mail in section
>> Network-Design / Schema...
>>
>> The focus is on 172.16.12.160/27 it should be routed via "bond0"
>>
>> ROUTE HOST Metric Interface
>> 172.16.12.32/27 172.16.12.4 1 1.000 bond5 # ROUTER B.1
>> 172.16.12.96/28 172.16.12.4 2 2.000 bond5 # ROUTER B.2
>> hidden node on metric 3
>> 172.16.12.128/27 172.16.12.4 4 4.000 bond5 # ROUTER C
>> 172.16.12.160/27 172.16.12.4 5 5.128 bond5 # ROUTER D
>>
>> 172.16.13.160/27 172.16.12.5 1 1.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.1
>> 172.16.14.32/27 172.16.12.5 2 2.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.2
>> 172.16.13.32/27 172.16.12.5 3 3.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.3
>>
>> This route should only been selected if "bond0" failed.
>>
>> This is the route as it should be:
>>
>> ROUTE HOST Metric Interface
>> 172.16.12.32/27 172.16.12.4 1 1.000 bond5 # ROUTER B.1
>> 172.16.12.96/28 172.16.12.4 2 2.000 bond5 # ROUTER B.2
>>
>> 172.16.13.160/27 172.16.12.5 1 1.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.1
>> 172.16.14.32/27 172.16.12.5 2 2.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.2
>> 172.16.13.32/27 172.16.12.5 3 3.000 bond0 # ROUTER A.3
>> 172.16.12.128/27 172.16.12.5 4 4.000 bond0 # ROUTER C
>> 172.16.12.160/27 172.16.12.5 5 5.000 bond0 # ROUTER D
>>
>>
>> So the weight parameter does not apply. Is this a bug in OLSR?
>>
>> The weight parameter is activated on ROUTER C.
>> ROUTER C sees ROUTER A.3 and ROUTER B.2.
>>
>> ROUTER C gives ROUTER A.3 a weight of 5 and ROUTER C weight of 10. So
>> ROUTER A.3 should be selected.
>>
>>
>> Liebe Grüße aus Freilassing,
>>
>> Michael Rack
>> RSM Freilassing
>> --
>> RSM Freilassing Tel.: +49 8654 607110
>> Nocksteinstr. 13 Fax.: +49 8654 670438
>> D-83395 Freilassing www.rsm-freilassing.de
>>
>>
>> Am 29.03.2012 17:15, schrieb Markus Kittenberger:
>>
>> i guess the weight does/did only with hopcount metric,..
>>
>> Markus
>>
>> p.s. true 0.5.5 is a previous version, but this was very very very long
>> ago. (-;
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Michael Rack
>> <(spam-protected)> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear olsr-users!
>>>
>>> I have a bad behavior and hope to get some help.
>>>
>>> I run only P2P Links (AP & STA) via wireless-lan and direct ethernet
>>> connections. Every node runs currently olsr version 0.6.0.
>>>
>>> The Problem:
>>> I have several upstreams and like to define which upstrem to be used via
>>> the weight parameter. In previous versions of olsr this worked fine (as i
>>> can remember v0.5.5). Now it dosn't.
>>>
>>> My Settings:
>>>>
>>>> Willingness 3
>>>> LinkQualityLevel 2
>>>> LinkQualityAlgorithm "etx_ff"
>>>> UseHysteresis no
>>>> TcRedundancy 2
>>>> MprCoverage 1
>>>>
>>>> InterfaceDefaults
>>>> {
>>>> Ip4Broadcast 255.255.255.2555
>>>> HelloInterval 2.0
>>>> HelloValidityTime 60.0
>>>> TcInterval 5.0
>>>> TcValidityTime 120.0
>>>> MidInterval 5.0
>>>> MidValidityTime 120.0
>>>> HnaInterval 5.0
>>>> HnaValidityTime 120.0
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Interface "wan"
>>>> {
>>>> Mode "ether"
>>>> Weight 10
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Interface "vlan2"
>>>> {
>>>> Mode "ether"
>>>> Weight 2
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Interface "vlan4"
>>>> {
>>>> Mode "ether"
>>>> Weight 5
>>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> But currently the wan-interface is selected. While everything goes via
>>> "wan" the routing change to "vlan4" but after a few minutes the routing
>>> switch back to "wan" and i get a bad packet-loss for 4 seconds while the
>>> routing is switching back to "wan" - but i don't know why because both links
>>> are up and running. I don't know where the packets get loosed.
>>>
>>> Currently Network-Design:
>>>
>>>> INTERNET-ROUTER
>>>> |
>>>> / ------- / \ ------- \
>>>> ROUTER A.1 ROUTER B.1
>>>> | |
>>>> ROUTER A.2 ROUTER B.2
>>>> | |
>>>> ROUTER A.3 |
>>>> | |
>>>> \ --------\ / ------- /
>>>> "vlan4" | "wan"
>>>> ROUTER C
>>>> |
>>>> ROUTER D
>>>> |
>>>> CLIENT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> MTR is done via ROUTER D and the internet. The routing decision is made
>>> on Router C that is multihomed (A.3 & B.2).
>>>
>>> So what have i to do, to make WEIGHT working?
>>>
>>> Liebe Grüße aus Freilassing,
>>>
>>> Michael Rack
>>> RSM Freilassing
>>> --
>>> RSM Freilassing Tel.: +49 8654 607110
>>> Nocksteinstr. 13 Fax.: +49 8654 670438
>>> D-83395 Freilassing www.rsm-freilassing.de
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Olsr-users mailing list
>>> (spam-protected)
>>> https://lists.olsr.org/mailman/listinfo/olsr-users
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Olsr-users mailing list
> (spam-protected)
> https://lists.olsr.org/mailman/listinfo/olsr-users
--
Steven Hawkings about cosmic inflation: "An increase of billions of
billions of percent in a tiny fraction of a second. Of course, that
was before the present government."
More information about the Olsr-users
mailing list