Hi everybody,
i'm trying to reproduce a PoC where i'm running multiple batman-adv instances(eg. bat0, bat1, batX) on the same broadcast domain.
So the scenario is:
---
host 1, host 2, host 3 are connected through an ethernet switch, leveraging on a single network card (eth0) each.
host 1 runs three batman-adv instances (bat0, bat1, bat2) and each of these instances uses eth0 as member interface
Each batman-adv instance lives good on the respecting "namespace" using the same broadcast domain to talk with neighbours.
---
Is this kind of scenario supported?
Thank you
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 13:23:32 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote:
i'm trying to reproduce a PoC where i'm running multiple batman-adv instances(eg. bat0, bat1, batX) on the same broadcast domain.
[...]
Is this kind of scenario supported?
No, you need something which implements separation of top of ethernet to avoid that bat0/bat1/.../batX see each other. E.g. VLAN, VXLAN, ...
Kind regards, Sven
Thank you for your tip.
Just one more info: is there an hard limit for the number of "bat" interfaces on the same host? Moreover, is the multiple batX namespaces a scenario that it is supposed to work fine, is it well tested or it still does need some love?
Il giorno mar 8 set 2020 alle ore 13:28 Sven Eckelmann sven@narfation.org ha scritto:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 13:23:32 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote:
i'm trying to reproduce a PoC where i'm running multiple batman-adv instances(eg. bat0, bat1, batX) on the same broadcast domain.
[...]
Is this kind of scenario supported?
No, you need something which implements separation of top of ethernet to avoid that bat0/bat1/.../batX see each other. E.g. VLAN, VXLAN, ...
Kind regards, Sven
On Wednesday, 9 September 2020 10:20:20 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote:
Just one more info: is there an hard limit for the number of "bat" interfaces on the same host?
But yes, running multiple batman-adv interfaces on the same host works fine. I am currently using 8 in parallel. The lower/hardif/slave interfaces are using VXLAN (to connect some servers in other datacenters), fastd (to connect remote "clients") and some other "ethernet" protocol compatible things.
And the hard limit is most likely the number of netdev's the Linux kernel can create (id wise and memory wise).
Moreover, is the multiple batX namespaces a scenario that it is supposed to work fine, is it well tested or it still does need some love?
I don't like the word "namespaces" here. Because this reverse to a completely different concept in the linux kernel.
And I don't know what you will end using - so I cannot say if this will work or is tested.
Kind regards, Sven
Il giorno mer 9 set 2020 alle ore 10:30 Sven Eckelmann sven@narfation.org ha scritto:
On Wednesday, 9 September 2020 10:20:20 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote:
Just one more info: is there an hard limit for the number of "bat" interfaces on the same host?
But yes, running multiple batman-adv interfaces on the same host works fine. I am currently using 8 in parallel. The lower/hardif/slave interfaces are using VXLAN (to connect some servers in other datacenters), fastd (to connect remote "clients") and some other "ethernet" protocol compatible things.
Great, this is exactly what I'm looking for! I'm running this for some experimental purposes. Are you running VXLANs in multicast modes?
And the hard limit is most likely the number of netdev's the Linux kernel can create (id wise and memory wise).
Moreover, is the multiple batX namespaces a scenario that it is supposed to work fine, is it well tested or it still does need some love?
I don't like the word "namespaces" here. Because this reverse to a completely different concept in the linux kernel.
Yeah, I'm sorry but I didn't know how to call them. "Mesh clouds" is a more exact term to call our batX?
And I don't know what you will end using - so I cannot say if this will work or is tested.
I will use them in a scenario where a have 3 hosts connected by an ethernet card each and a switch. Then, I have to connect at layer 2 these hosts to batman, but I need to separate their traffic through different batman-adv "mesh clouds" (in my case I can't use VLANs, QinQ or stuff like that to do so)
Kind regards, Sven
On Wednesday, 9 September 2020 10:50:24 CEST Alessandro Bolletta wrote: [...]
Great, this is exactly what I'm looking for! I'm running this for some experimental purposes. Are you running VXLANs in multicast modes?
I am using it between datacenters with handcrafted forwarding rules. And I am using gluon which uses link local "multicast" mode [1].
[...]
I don't like the word "namespaces" here. Because this reverse to a completely different concept in the linux kernel.
Yeah, I'm sorry but I didn't know how to call them. "Mesh clouds" is a more exact term to call our batX?
I would call them batadv interfaces. And the thing behind it - maybe mesh cloud.
And I don't know what you will end using - so I cannot say if this will work or is tested.
I will use them in a scenario where a have 3 hosts connected by an ethernet card each and a switch. Then, I have to connect at layer 2 these hosts to batman, but I need to separate their traffic through different batman-adv "mesh clouds" (in my case I can't use VLANs, QinQ or stuff like that to do so)
I've already used both VLAN and VXLAN (and other things) for stuff like this. But there can always be problems with your kernel/driver/batman-adv/... version or even the hardware. And I can guarantee that all of them will create some kind of cost (overhead, performance, ...).
Kind regards, Sven
[1] https://github.com/freifunk-gluon/gluon/blob/dd76e0898d70a123d8e7f178384fec8...
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Alessandro Bolletta -
Sven Eckelmann