El 21/10/13 15:17, Antonio Quartulli escribió:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 01:23:37PM +0100, Bruno Alexandre Taraio dos Santos Antunes wrote:
I think its spanish for zero
In that case..If I remember correctly you can have TQ=0 only for "Potential Netxthops". If an originator has a TQ=0 on the best path then it is should not be shown in the originator table.
However, if you have further doubts, please post the table.
Regards,
Hi all,
That's correct. Nodes with cero value (TQ=0) there are in "Potential Nexthops" but there are a lot of them in the originator table. In some cases, only there is one node with TQ major than 0. Example:
172.16.0.9 0.300s (196) 172.16.0.36 [ wlan1]: 172.16.0.40 ( 0) 172.16.0.35 ( 0) 172.16.0.22 ( 0) 172.16.0.39 ( 0) 172.16.0.33 ( 0) 172.16.0.32 ( 0) 172.16.0.36 (196)
Full table in this link: hxxp://pastebin.com/6rpieA7y
There are another cases, a behaviour that I don't understand is this: Traffic is being routed using a SINGLE jump (or direct link) very low bandwidth to its target, but there are many other options with better bandwidth, however using more jumps/links, why is this happening and how can I control it?
Number of hop are more important than link quality to calculate TQ value? Is there any "well-known formula" to calculate TQ?
I make some tests changing default class of a client to 3 (batctl gw client 3) with same results. What is the best client value for a large enviroment (about 40 AP's)?
Thanks for all. Regards, Fernando.