Hi all,
I'm view in originators table that there are nodes with cero value of TQ. Thats is normal this behaviour?
King regards. Fernando.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:05:04PM +0200, Fernando Pizarro wrote:
Hi all,
I'm view in originators table that there are nodes with cero value of TQ. Thats is normal this behaviour?
What does "cero" mean? Can you report a sample output, please?
Moreover, what version of batman-adv and linux-kernel are you running? Is it openwrt?
Regards,
I think its spanish for zero
On 21 Oct, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Antonio Quartulli antonio@meshcoding.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:05:04PM +0200, Fernando Pizarro wrote:
Hi all,
I'm view in originators table that there are nodes with cero value of TQ. Thats is normal this behaviour?
What does "cero" mean? Can you report a sample output, please?
Moreover, what version of batman-adv and linux-kernel are you running? Is it openwrt?
Regards,
-- Antonio Quartulli
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,
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.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 06:37:04PM +0200, Fernando Pizarro wrote:
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)
It depends on your network. There is no rule saying "there must be more than one potential nexthops having TQ > 0". For sure you must have at least one with TQ non zero (which would be your best nexthop).
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?
Bandwidth itself is not considered when computing the TQ. The TQ is computed starting from a packet loss counter. Moreover the protocol introduces a "hop penalty" which is used to avoid loops and to push the protocol to use the shorter route in case of many "optimally equal" paths.
Number of hop are more important than link quality to calculate TQ
You can try to tune the value of the "hop penalty" I was talking about by using the knob at "/sys/class/net/<mesh_iface>/mesh/hop_penalty". Its meaning is described in Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net-mesh.
This knob decides how much the TQ has to be reduced at each hop (remember that there are other penalties too...). You can read this page to get some more details about the hop penalty and more: http://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/OGM
However be sure that you know what you are doing when changing the hop penalty value.
value? Is there any "well-known formula" to calculate TQ?
No "well known" formula, sorry. The TQ is the result of a number of operations that you can read from the code and use to write your formula. So writing a formula is still possible but it is not present in any documentation for the reason I stated before.
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)?
the class you are talking about is part of the gateway feature. Be sure you have read this http://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki/Gateways before going on. This feature does not affect the routing at all.
Regards,
b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
-
Antonio Quartulli -
Bruno Alexandre Taraio dos Santos Antunes -
Fernando Pizarro