I see on the OpenWRT site that there was supposed to be a Wireless Battle Mesh a couple weeks ago. Does anyone have some results from the event?
Gus
On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 03:58:29PM -0800, Gus Wirth wrote:
I see on the OpenWRT site that there was supposed to be a Wireless Battle Mesh a couple weeks ago. Does anyone have some results from the event?
Gus
Hi Gus,
yes, there was the 2nd Wireless Battle Mesh a couple of weeks ago in Brussels and also a bunch of BATMAN fans/devs had been there :). The results have mostly been of individual tests, every one of those groups was installing their protocols and daemons on those tiny Fonera routers and did mostly debugging, testing and bug-hunting or general layer 1 wifi tests (which turned out to be the most broken one ;) ). All in all every group was pretty quick at providing a set of configurations and proving, that their daemons were running stable on a current OpenWRT trunk version. The WBMII people are going to submit a more detailed report in the next couple of weeks. From the BATMAN side, it was a great chance for a face to face meeting and we used most of the time for discussions about the veeery soon to come next stable BATMAN-Adv release and ideas and plans for the development of the next version (which will basically be getting ready for and into the linux mainline kernel and making BATMAN responding to changes faster). We will also be going to write a little summary of the event and its results and conclusions for BATMAN, which will be published in the next couple of days in the open-mesh-wiki. So stay tuned :).
Cheers, Linus
PS: Just out of curiosity and also because the reports are in progress right now, what kind of results are you expecting?
On 11/04/2009 06:49 PM, Linus Lüssing wrote: [snip]
PS: Just out of curiosity and also because the reports are in progress right now, what kind of results are you expecting?
Things I'm curious about:
How was the mesh configured?
What tools did you use to test the mesh?
How does the mesh react to the addition of a node? How long does it take a new node to integrate itself into the mesh?
How does the mesh react to the removal of a node? How long does it take the mesh to react to the node removal?
How does the mesh handle interference? Did you have anything to generate interference for testing?
What tools were used to visualize the mesh? Any images available?
Results of throughput testing for one hop, two hop, etc.
What was the CPU load on the mesh nodes while relaying traffic? What were the nodes?
I'll probably have more questions later.
Gus
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Gus Wirth gwirth79@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/04/2009 06:49 PM, Linus Lüssing wrote: [snip]
PS: Just out of curiosity and also because the reports are in
progress right now, what kind of results are you expecting?
Things I'm curious about:
things you can read allready : http://hackerspace.be/Wireless_Battle_Mesh_v2
(disclaimer: I was not at this WBM but at the previous one - but I think some things can be generalized, so I dare to give some answers here. Others who were there might want to add )
On Nov 5, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Gus Wirth wrote:
On 11/04/2009 06:49 PM, Linus Lüssing wrote: [snip]
PS: Just out of curiosity and also because the reports are in progress right now, what kind of results are you expecting?
Things I'm curious about:
How was the mesh configured?
What tools did you use to test the mesh?
How does the mesh react to the addition of a node? How long does it take a new node to integrate itself into the mesh?
Many of the protocols tested at the WBM tests so far can be tuned to different timing parameter. So, in theory you can make them pretty "fast" (but you have more communication overhead). There is AFAIK no agreed upon standard setting of comparable timing and config parameters.
BATMAN per see seems to have a theoretical limitation that Juliusz found out: exponential time for convergence in the presence of loss. This result was obtained thru reasoning and logic, not thru tests.
How does the mesh react to the removal of a node? How long does it take the mesh to react to the node removal?
see above
How does the mesh handle interference? Did you have anything to generate interference for testing?
interference is a layer 2 issue. Unfortunately at the last WBM in Paris, I wish I had a spectrum analyzer to actually compare the testbed with the "interference surrounding" it was embedded within.
What tools were used to visualize the mesh? Any images available?
Results of throughput testing for one hop, two hop, etc.
What was the CPU load on the mesh nodes while relaying traffic? What were the nodes?
I'll probably have more questions later.
In Paris, it was *very* hard to get comparable results at all. However it made sense to discuss and improve the respective implementations however :)
a.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:17 AM, L. Aaron Kaplan aaron@lo-res.org wrote:
(disclaimer: I was not at this WBM but at the previous one - but I think some things can be generalized, so I dare to give some answers here. Others who were there might want to add )
On Nov 5, 2009, at 6:20 PM, Gus Wirth wrote:
On 11/04/2009 06:49 PM, Linus Lüssing wrote: [snip]
PS: Just out of curiosity and also because the reports are in progress right now, what kind of results are you expecting?
Things I'm curious about:
How was the mesh configured?
What tools did you use to test the mesh?
How does the mesh react to the addition of a node? How long does it take a new node to integrate itself into the mesh?
Many of the protocols tested at the WBM tests so far can be tuned to different timing parameter. So, in theory you can make them pretty "fast" (but you have more communication overhead). There is AFAIK no agreed upon standard setting of comparable timing and config parameters.
BATMAN per see seems to have a theoretical limitation that Juliusz found out: exponential time for convergence in the presence of loss. This result was obtained thru reasoning and logic, not thru tests.
How does the mesh react to the removal of a node? How long does it take the mesh to react to the node removal?
see above
How does the mesh handle interference? Did you have anything to generate interference for testing?
interference is a layer 2 issue. Unfortunately at the last WBM in Paris, I wish I had a spectrum analyzer to actually compare the testbed with the "interference surrounding" it was embedded within.
Next Battle Mesh should be organised in a 2.4Ghz-free zone (ie a remote area with no wifi in the surroundings).
And I also think the foneras are not the right platforms to use, since they only ouput 1.5Mo/sec in ad-hoc mode in static routing configuration.
-- Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org> FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 "In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators."
Next Battle Mesh should be organised in a 2.4Ghz-free zone (ie a remote area with no wifi in the surroundings).
:) it is funny that you said that but after Paris we were also thinking of getting a cave for tests hehe.
We were wondering about reflections there however.
And I also think the foneras are not the right platforms to use, since they only ouput 1.5Mo/sec in ad-hoc mode in static routing configuration.
yes! agreed.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:48 PM, L. Aaron Kaplan aaron@lo-res.org wrote:
Next Battle Mesh should be organised in a 2.4Ghz-free zone (ie a remote area with no wifi in the surroundings).
:) it is funny that you said that but after Paris we were also thinking of getting a cave for tests hehe.
We were wondering about reflections there however.
Outdoor tests. Indoor tests are non-sense.
The problem with outdoor tests is "permanent power supplies".
And I also think the foneras are not the right platforms to use, since they only ouput 1.5Mo/sec in ad-hoc mode in static routing configuration.
yes! agreed.
Is it a problem of the ad-hoc driver or of the hardware itself?
-- Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org> FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 "In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or democratically elected legislators."
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Benjamin Henrion bh@udev.org wrote:
We were wondering about reflections there however.
Outdoor tests. Indoor tests are non-sense.
Then we should go to Las Vegas or Sahara... where most Wifi records are broken :-) at 2.4ghz tests we are also influenced by "water" ... due to rivers, lakes and that in the air :-)
The problem with outdoor tests is "permanent power supplies".
Didn't you see those nifty batteries powering the foneras? if you run iperf on your laptop they could run your fonera for 2hours and more ! if you could power it at 3.3V you could even reach 4 hours... those model 2100 are using 50% of your power just for heating the air surrounding it...not for the wifi chip...
And I also think the foneras are not the right platforms to use, since they only ouput 1.5Mo/sec in ad-hoc mode in static routing configuration.
yes! agreed.
Is it a problem of the ad-hoc driver or of the hardware itself?
I only know that they can handle 1.9Mo/sec in 'NAT' handling...but that wasn't the case during these tests iirc? The wifi speeds were even set at 2mbit fixed during tests outside where more than 100meter between each hop and still a ping going accross 4 hops
http://picasaweb.google.be/steven.leeman/20091017BattleMesh2#539401335861392... http://picasaweb.google.be/steven.leeman/20091017BattleMesh2#539420627807833...
yes! agreed.
Is it a problem of the ad-hoc driver or of the hardware itself?
I dont know but I think it is both. Recently thanks to nbd (Felix) the driver became very good in my humble opinion. But still the hardware (FON) is crappy enough to be very cheap but still good enough for the price / performance ratio ;-) (Especially if you get it on discount from FON.com for 10 EURs)
Personally I love PC Engines Alix boards. Swiss design. Cool and very stable stuff :)
My 2 cents, a.
Dear Gus,
We are finalizing the report from the WBMv2 and will available in the coming days. Hopefully until the end of this week/
Thank you.
Xavier.
On Thursday 05 November 2009 00:58:29 Gus Wirth wrote:
I see on the OpenWRT site that there was supposed to be a Wireless Battle Mesh a couple weeks ago. Does anyone have some results from the event?
Gus _______________________________________________ B.A.T.M.A.N mailing list B.A.T.M.A.N@lists.open-mesh.net https://lists.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Benjamin Henrion -
Carcellelist -
Gus Wirth -
L. Aaron Kaplan -
Linus Lüssing -
Steven Leeman