From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Marek Lindner Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:06:00 +0200 References: <201207171257.23627.lindner_marek@yahoo.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201207182206.00711.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 On Tuesday, July 17, 2012 20:06:27 Mitar wrote: > > I was more curious about the bandwidth routing than the latency stuff. > > The current routing algorithm already takes latency into account. An > > alternate path always need to be better than the current path. If both > > paths are equal the faster packets win the race. > > Hm. This happens only first time, it does not really change the route > latter on, if chosen path latency increases and becomes worse than the > second path, but packet loss stays the same (zero). Or it does? No, it always works. The slower route needs to be better than the faster route. If there is a new "faster" route the same applies. Just give it a try and see for yourself. Cheers, Marek