From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Marek Lindner Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 12:02:45 +0200 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201207161202.45306.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Route selection over VPN links Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking Hi, > As we are nearing to our transition to Batman, we are playing some > scenarios with it and our current setups and layouts. Currently we > have many nodes connected to more and more VPN servers we have. And we > would like to use Batman on top of that. What happens is that we would > like to use the Batman also for routing over those VPN links. So that > we can connect our nodes to all VPN servers at the same time and > Batman then chooses over which tunnel the data should be routed. And > of course this is a bit different situation then wireless routing. For > example, different VPN servers might have different free capacities at > the moment available, or at least different overall capacity provided > (somebody can donate 100 Mbit/s on the server, somebody else 50 > Mbit/s), and then there are also different latencies. Is there some > way for Batman to prefer routes based on this information? So latency > over one link and capacity? I know that capacity is problematic to > measure for wireless links, but here we could configure them manually. > Latency could be measured. And maybe it would even be enough to > measure latency, assuming that congested link would have higher > latency. So the logic could be: > * if packet loss is different, choose the one with lower packet loss > * if packet loss is the same, choose the one with lower latency > > Such logic could probably be even user also on wireless links, no? > > Anyway, is this doable? If I understand correctly, Batman does not > support some plugin system where we could inject this in? Would be > this some addition which could go into the core implementation? > > I think I asked a bit of this questions before, but now we have a bit > more concrete picture what would be nice to have for our setup to play > really nicely. the later versions of batman support a routing protocol plugin structure (check bat_iv_ogm.c to get an idea). Using bandwidth information for the routing decision is a nice idea but how does your concept look like ? How should the routing logic look like ? Cheers, Marek