[Olsr-users] Doubts about Willingness, MPR Selection and Routing.

Alex López (spam-protected)
Fri Feb 1 14:04:44 CET 2013


Just to confirm this, in the olsrd versions 0.6.x, the MPR selecion
algorithm doesn't work as it should and you are fixing this in the new
olsrd v2 versions?

2013/2/1 Ferry Huberts <(spam-protected)>

> MPR doesn't work properly in olsrd v1
>
> Henning is working on v2, in which this should work properly
>
>
> On 01/02/13 13:45, Alex López wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> After reading some documentation about OLSR and testing it with OLSRd in
>> OpenWRT I have some questions that I hope you can help me to answer.
>>
>> First of all, about the MPR selection. I read the algorithm described in
>> RFC 3626 but when I try it in my lab, it doesn't work as expected (or
>> maybe I don't understand it well), for example:
>>
>> - If set a 4 router network (R1, R2, R3, R4):
>>
>>                /--R2--\
>> R1 --------/          \---------R4
>>               \---R3---/
>>
>> Where *R1 and R4 cannot see each other directly and R2 and R3 are in the
>> same place. All routers have the same TX Power. Link Quality is set to 0.*
>>
>>
>> 1.- The thing is that it doesn't matter which Willingness I set to R2 or
>> R3 they are always selected as MPR (except when they have will=0). In
>> theory, if R2Will=6 and R3Will=1, shouldn’t be R2 the only MPR? Why to
>> choose 2 MPR instead of using only one and minimizing the flooding?
>>
>> 2.- Another thing I've found with this configuration is about the
>> routing. If I try to send a file from R1 to R4, all the data is always
>> going through R2 and is only going through R3 when R2Will=0. The routing
>> shouldn’t select the route taking into account the Willingness parameter
>> as is said in the RFC 3626?:
>>
>> /           3.2  Several topology entries may be used to select a next hop
>>
>>                 R_next_addr for reaching the node R_dest_addr.  When h=1,
>>                 ties should be broken such that nodes with highest
>>                 willingness and MPR selectors are preferred as next hop./
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.- In another different setup, where all the routers can see each
>> other, none of the routers is selected as an MPR, is this normal?
>> Shouldn’t be at least one MPR in a OLSR ad-hoc network?
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance for the answers.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Ferry Huberts
>



-- 
Alex Lopez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.olsr.org/pipermail/olsr-users/attachments/20130201/f3144653/attachment.html>


More information about the Olsr-users mailing list