27 Jul
2007
27 Jul
'07
3:23 p.m.
Hi,
guys, please mention, that in OLSRd this is simply
problematic for
you in *Berlin* where you use private IPs.
the majority of all wireless mesh networks out there don't have a good
relationship to an ISP which routes all the traffic and sponsors public
IPs ...
I really think you have a nice solution in Vienna which unfortunately is not
reproducible everywhere.
And therefore the NAT causes problems. The tunnel
trick works
*just*as*well* for OLSRd BTW.
So far OLSRd has no builtin tunnel functionality and that's why you can't do
the same trick.
By the way, you should know that the dyngw plugin is real pain. Too often it
enables or disables the Internet connection where this is totally
unneccessary. And it does not solve the problem. It just tries to hide a flaw
because I rely on the information the gateway sends me.
I just often have the feeling that you want to
dissmiss olsrd becasue
batman *has* to be better, since it is already in the name. That
sucks a bit. Well, whatever...
Aaron, please don't feel personally attacked by this. You know that we started
batman because we were not happy with many things in OLSR.
The only reason for me to mention OLSR was that many people here expect us to
redo all the things OLSR does. And I just want to remind them that batman is
a different project.
I think both approaches have something to it. OLSRd is
well tested
(and has ugly code, yes) but batman really has to be still tested out
in the wild with many nodes. A routing protocol evolves with the load
that is applied to it.
That is the key issue in my opinion.
I absolutely agree.
Anything new with the approaches to create an RFC for
batman by the way?
We are working on it.
Regards,
Marek