* Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
@ 2013-07-06 4:19 Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 4:43 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-06 4:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hams
Hmm, is netrom known to work? I'm on 3.9.6-200, and I'm getting weird
results with netrom.
nrattach -i 192.168.0.10 netrom just keeps just keeps responding to
'NET/ROM port bound to device nr0' and then
if I call again
nrattach -i 192.168.0.11 netrom2
this again binds to device nr0
Then netromd returns 'no NET/ROM ports defined'
I'm running fedora 18.
So far, the rest of ax25 on fedora 18 seems okay.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 4:19 Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200 Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-06 4:43 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 5:33 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-06 4:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hams
On 7/5/2013 9:19 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> Hmm, is netrom known to work? I'm on 3.9.6-200, and I'm getting weird
> results with netrom.
>
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio kernel: [ 50.626653] NET: Registered
protocol family 6
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
/sys/devices/virtual/net/nr0: couldn't determine device driver; ignoring...
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
/sys/devices/virtual/net/nr1: couldn't determine device driver; ignoring...
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
/sys/devices/virtual/net/nr3: couldn't determine device driver; ignoring...
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: Logging in as gateways ...
NET/ROM port netrom bound to device nr0
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
/sys/devices/virtual/net/nr2: couldn't determine device driver; ignoring...
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: NET/ROM port netrom2 bound to
device nr0
Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: netromd: no NET/ROM ports defined
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 4:43 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-06 5:33 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 5:42 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-06 5:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hams
On 7/5/2013 9:43 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> On 7/5/2013 9:19 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
>> Hmm, is netrom known to work? I'm on 3.9.6-200, and I'm getting
>> weird results with netrom.
>>
Wait, wait, this is definitely a Fedora issue and not a kernel issue.
Because I copied in nrattach that I compiled myself and it started
correctly. (I don't think it's a 'old versions of libax25 lying around
issue' but I haven't completely ruled that out yet.)
>
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio kernel: [ 50.626653] NET: Registered
> protocol family 6
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
> /sys/devices/virtual/net/nr0: couldn't determine device driver;
> ignoring...
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
> /sys/devices/virtual/net/nr1: couldn't determine device driver;
> ignoring...
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
> /sys/devices/virtual/net/nr3: couldn't determine device driver;
> ignoring...
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: Logging in as gateways ...
> NET/ROM port netrom bound to device nr0
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio NetworkManager[599]: <warn>
> /sys/devices/virtual/net/nr2: couldn't determine device driver;
> ignoring...
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: NET/ROM port netrom2 bound to
> device nr0
> Jul 6 00:37:31 hamradio rc.local[987]: netromd: no NET/ROM ports defined
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 5:33 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-06 5:42 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 17:24 ` David Ranch
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-06 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-hams
On 7/5/2013 10:33 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> On 7/5/2013 9:43 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
>> On 7/5/2013 9:19 PM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
>>> Hmm, is netrom known to work? I'm on 3.9.6-200, and I'm getting
>>> weird results with netrom.
>>>
>
> Wait, wait, this is definitely a Fedora issue and not a kernel issue.
> Because I copied in nrattach that I compiled myself and it started
> correctly. (I don't think it's a 'old versions of libax25 lying
> around issue' but I haven't completely ruled that out yet.)
Wait a minute. Someone has been mucking about with nrattach.c . They
removed the the code that actually connects the netrom port. Bahh..
#ifdef notdef
if (!startiface(dev, hp))
return 1;
#endif
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 5:42 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-06 17:24 ` David Ranch
2013-07-06 18:32 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Ranch @ 2013-07-06 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cathryn Mataga; +Cc: linux-hams
Hello Cathryn,
Which AX.25 libs/apps/tools are you using? If you're using the
"official AX.25" ones, you're going to find this and other bugs. I
recommend you use VE7FET / F6BVP's version at
http://code.google.com/p/linuxax25/ as it has all of the required fixes
that I've come across. You can find .spec files for this code here:
http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/
(don't use the ones that have "f6bvp" in the name as they reflect an
older version of the libs).
--David
KI6ZHD
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 17:24 ` David Ranch
@ 2013-07-06 18:32 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-06 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: linux-hams
On 7/6/2013 10:24 AM, David Ranch wrote:
>
> Hello Cathryn,
>
> Which AX.25 libs/apps/tools are you using? If you're using the
> "official AX.25" ones, you're going to find this and other bugs. I
> recommend you use VE7FET / F6BVP's version at
> http://code.google.com/p/linuxax25/ as it has all of the required
> fixes that I've come across. You can find .spec files for this code
> here:
> http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/
> (don't use the ones that have "f6bvp" in the name as they reflect an
> older version of the libs).
I was using the libraries that are the default in Fedora. I thought
maybe I could just install Fedora 18 and be good, but it looks like
there are a few kinks in the code that comes with this distribution,
including an odd change that's not from ftp.linux-ax25.org.
Anyway, now that I'm mucking with this stuff, I can give this version a
shot too. See how it goes.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 17:24 ` David Ranch
2013-07-06 18:32 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
2013-07-07 5:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-07 6:08 ` Netrom: Quality issue Cathryn Mataga
1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Osterried @ 2013-07-06 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ranch; +Cc: Cathryn Mataga, linux-hams, ralf
the bug you mentioned was fixed in 2009-11-02
http://www.linux-ax25.org/cvsweb/ax25-tools/netrom/nrattach.c
Needless to say, that we recommend to use the official tree and deeply
appreciate, that we get bug reports and patches.
I get not tired to mention, that it's not wise to have thousands of
copies of code, with incompatibilities or that have fixed one bug but
introduced others. Our ham community is not that large (it even becomes
smaller) that we need so many different sub probjects (for the same thing).
Apart from this:
if you're in a netrom (I am not): I might need help.
A few weeks ago we got a bug report for netromd. nodes are learned,
even if they're under the configured minimum threshold.
The netrom code is very old and didn't change. Perhaps it's an issue with
newer kernels. Or it never had worked as expected.
A test setup is quite time consuming (3 test-computers/VMs) and I did not have
the time to set them up.
The OM reported:
# /etc/ax25/nrbroadcast
#
# The format of this file is:
#
# ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_qual verbose
#
1 5 120 120 0
--
So I would assume that any new neighbor gets a quality of 120 and minimum quality to show up in my table is also 120. I would expect to have nothing but direct neighbors in my routing table.
However I have this:
# cat /proc/net/nr_nodes
callsign mnemonic w n qual obs neigh qual obs neigh qual obs neigh
ND6C-4 LPRC3 1 1 56 6 00001
KF6FPU-5 LIVER 1 1 56 6 00001
WA6TOW-1 PAC 1 1 56 6 00001
KI6UDZ-7 FCITY 1 1 56 6 00001
W6TUK-7 FOSN3 1 1 120 6 00001
--
Why do I have all of those < 120 routes showing up as nodes? I am missing something? I just upgraded ax25-tools to the latest and greatest and this is still happening.
vy 73,
- Thomas dl9sau
On 2013-07-06 10:24:06 -0700, David Ranch <linux-hams@trinnet.net>
wrote in <51D852B6.3060401@trinnet.net>:
>
> Hello Cathryn,
>
> Which AX.25 libs/apps/tools are you using? If you're using the
> "official AX.25" ones, you're going to find this and other bugs. I
> recommend you use VE7FET / F6BVP's version at
> http://code.google.com/p/linuxax25/ as it has all of the required
> fixes that I've come across. You can find .spec files for this
> code here:
> http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/
> (don't use the ones that have "f6bvp" in the name as they reflect an
> older version of the libs).
>
> --David
> KI6ZHD
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
@ 2013-07-07 5:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-07 6:08 ` Netrom: Quality issue Cathryn Mataga
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-07 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Osterried; +Cc: linux-hams
On 7/6/2013 1:28 PM, Thomas Osterried wrote:
> the bug you mentioned was fixed in 2009-11-02
> http://www.linux-ax25.org/cvsweb/ax25-tools/netrom/nrattach.c
>
> Needless to say, that we recommend to use the official tree and deeply
> appreciate, that we get bug reports and patches.
Okay, I filed a bug with Fedora to see if they can update what they ship.
> if you're in a netrom (I am not): I might need help.
> A few weeks ago we got a bug report for netromd. nodes are learned,
> even if they're under the configured minimum threshold.
> The netrom code is very old and didn't change. Perhaps it's an issue with
> newer kernels. Or it never had worked as expected.
> A test setup is quite time consuming (3 test-computers/VMs) and I did not have
> the time to set them up.
Well, I do have a bit list of nodes on my system right now. It looks
like what he says happens does happen. I have worst_qual set to 100 and
I do see a handful of nodes with quality just below 100, some as low as
94, but none too far below 100. I'll uninstall the Fedora libax25 and
put in the latest, see if it's any different.
> The OM reported:
>
> # /etc/ax25/nrbroadcast
> #
> # The format of this file is:
> #
> # ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_qual verbose
> #
> 1 5 120 120 0
>
> --
>
> So I would assume that any new neighbor gets a quality of 120 and minimum quality to show up in my table is also 120. I would expect to have nothing but direct neighbors in my routing table.
>
> However I have this:
>
> # cat /proc/net/nr_nodes
> callsign mnemonic w n qual obs neigh qual obs neigh qual obs neigh
> ND6C-4 LPRC3 1 1 56 6 00001
> KF6FPU-5 LIVER 1 1 56 6 00001
> WA6TOW-1 PAC 1 1 56 6 00001
> KI6UDZ-7 FCITY 1 1 56 6 00001
> W6TUK-7 FOSN3 1 1 120 6 00001
>
> --
>
> Why do I have all of those < 120 routes showing up as nodes? I am missing something? I just upgraded ax25-tools to the latest and greatest and this is still happening.
>
>
> vy 73,
> - Thomas dl9sau
>
> On 2013-07-06 10:24:06 -0700, David Ranch <linux-hams@trinnet.net>
> wrote in <51D852B6.3060401@trinnet.net>:
>> Hello Cathryn,
>>
>> Which AX.25 libs/apps/tools are you using? If you're using the
>> "official AX.25" ones, you're going to find this and other bugs. I
>> recommend you use VE7FET / F6BVP's version at
>> http://code.google.com/p/linuxax25/ as it has all of the required
>> fixes that I've come across. You can find .spec files for this
>> code here:
>> http://www.trinityos.com/HAM/CentosDigitalModes/usr/src/redhat/SPECS/
>> (don't use the ones that have "f6bvp" in the name as they reflect an
>> older version of the libs).
>>
>> --David
>> KI6ZHD
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
2013-07-07 5:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-07 6:08 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-07 16:59 ` David Ranch
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-07 6:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Osterried; +Cc: linux-hams
This code is in both your 0.0.8 and 0.0.10
It compares the quality and then afterwards it decreases the value
if (best_quality < port_list[index].worst_qual) {
if (debug && logging)
syslog(LOG_DEBUG, "netromr: add_node: quality
less than worst_qual");
return FALSE;
}
nr_node->quality = ((quality * best_quality) + 128) / 256;
Err, I don't think it's really a bug. He's probably got a node coming
in at quality 120 and then it does (120 * 120 +128)/256 Maybe update the
man page to explain what's going on.
worstqual this is the worst quality node received
from a routing broadcast that will be added
to our routing table.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-07 6:08 ` Netrom: Quality issue Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-07 16:59 ` David Ranch
2013-07-07 18:45 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Ranch @ 2013-07-07 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cathryn Mataga; +Cc: Thomas Osterried, linux-hams
I agree with Cathryn that this is a "as designed" issue though I'd argue
we should CHANGE it. Specifically, the Linux netromd man page says
"RECEIVED from a routing broadcast" where as
Kantronics KPC3+ -
http://www.kantronics.com/documents/kpc-3plus_manual_RevD.pdf
"
Page 137
. . .
When K-Net hears neighbor node (A) transmit a node broadcast, it
computes the quality to distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.) contained in that
broadcast
by using the quality that is assigned to neighbor node (A). If the
***resultant
computation*** is less than MINQUAL, the distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.)
are not
added to the nodes table (see QUALITY command).
--
I also looked around for finding the default for the X1J TNC but
couldn't find a clear citable URL but I believe the default there is 140.
--David
> Err, I don't think it's really a bug. He's probably got a node coming
> in at quality 120 and then it does (120 * 120 +128)/256 Maybe update
> the man page to explain what's going on.
>
> worstqual this is the worst quality node received
> from a routing broadcast that will be added
> to our routing table.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-07 16:59 ` David Ranch
@ 2013-07-07 18:45 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-08 3:40 ` David Ranch
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-07 18:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ranch; +Cc: Thomas Osterried, linux-hams
On 7/7/2013 9:59 AM, David Ranch wrote:
>
> I agree with Cathryn that this is a "as designed" issue though I'd
> argue we should CHANGE it. Specifically, the Linux netromd man page
> says "RECEIVED from a routing broadcast" where as
>
My concern about changing this is that for a configuration like the one
here, basically nodes will only get added if they come in as quality
255. That is the (254*120 + 128)/256 = 119.
# ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_qual verbose
#
1 5 120 120 0
> Kantronics KPC3+ -
> http://www.kantronics.com/documents/kpc-3plus_manual_RevD.pdf
> "
> Page 137
> . . .
> When K-Net hears neighbor node (A) transmit a node broadcast, it
> computes the quality to distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.) contained in
> that broadcast
> by using the quality that is assigned to neighbor node (A). If the
> ***resultant
> computation*** is less than MINQUAL, the distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.)
> are not
> added to the nodes table (see QUALITY command).
> --
>
>
> I also looked around for finding the default for the X1J TNC but
> couldn't find a clear citable URL but I believe the default there is 140.
>
> --David
>
>
>
>
>> Err, I don't think it's really a bug. He's probably got a node coming
>> in at quality 120 and then it does (120 * 120 +128)/256 Maybe update
>> the man page to explain what's going on.
>>
>> worstqual this is the worst quality node received
>> from a routing broadcast that will be added
>> to our routing table.
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-07 18:45 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-08 3:40 ` David Ranch
2013-07-08 3:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Ranch @ 2013-07-08 3:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cathryn Mataga; +Cc: Thomas Osterried, linux-hams
Maybe a way to fix this is with a new parameter, say:
# ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_heard_qual verbose worst_calced_qual
1 5 120 120 0 120
--David
On 07/07/2013 11:45 AM, Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> On 7/7/2013 9:59 AM, David Ranch wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Cathryn that this is a "as designed" issue though I'd
>> argue we should CHANGE it. Specifically, the Linux netromd man page
>> says "RECEIVED from a routing broadcast" where as
>>
>
> My concern about changing this is that for a configuration like the one
> here, basically nodes will only get added if they come in as quality
> 255. That is the (254*120 + 128)/256 = 119.
>
> # ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_qual verbose
> #
>
> 1 5 120 120 0
>
>
>> Kantronics KPC3+ -
>> http://www.kantronics.com/documents/kpc-3plus_manual_RevD.pdf
>> "
>> Page 137
>> . . .
>> When K-Net hears neighbor node (A) transmit a node broadcast, it
>> computes the quality to distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.) contained in
>> that broadcast
>> by using the quality that is assigned to neighbor node (A). If the
>> ***resultant
>> computation*** is less than MINQUAL, the distant nodes (B, C, D, etc.)
>> are not
>> added to the nodes table (see QUALITY command).
>> --
>>
>>
>> I also looked around for finding the default for the X1J TNC but
>> couldn't find a clear citable URL but I believe the default there is 140.
>>
>> --David
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Err, I don't think it's really a bug. He's probably got a node coming
>>> in at quality 120 and then it does (120 * 120 +128)/256 Maybe update
>>> the man page to explain what's going on.
>>>
>>> worstqual this is the worst quality node received
>>> from a routing broadcast that will be added
>>> to our routing table.
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-08 3:40 ` David Ranch
@ 2013-07-08 3:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-08 7:48 ` Thomas Osterried
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-08 3:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ranch; +Cc: Thomas Osterried, linux-hams
On 7/7/2013 8:40 PM, David Ranch wrote:
>
> Maybe a way to fix this is with a new parameter, say:
>
> # ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_heard_qual verbose worst_calced_qual
> 1 5 120 120 0 120
>
> --David
If we're up for new parameters. I suggest a worst_quality_to_send. This
is the issue as I see it. We're getting big lists from the internet,
and the internet partners can handle them, but if you have any RF links,
they'll be bombarded by a giant list of nodes in the broadcast. The
user connects to a 1200 baud TNC, types "NODES" and the table is filled
up with junk from far away. He falls asleep before the list finishes
printing.
We add a 'worst_quality_to_send' and then you can set a worst quality to
send to each specific connection. Set your RF links to 255 and your IP
connections to 1. That way the RF connections can get a tiny list of
only the absolute most important stuff, but internet partners can get
all the distant nodes. This is a pretty easy change to make. It's all
in netromd and doesn't require any mucking with the kernel.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-08 3:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
@ 2013-07-08 7:48 ` Thomas Osterried
2013-07-08 13:24 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Osterried @ 2013-07-08 7:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Cathryn Mataga
Cc: David Ranch, Thomas Osterried, linux-hams, ralf@linux-mips.org Baechle
Am 08.07.2013 um 05:49 schrieb Cathryn Mataga <cathryn@junglevision.com>:
> On 7/7/2013 8:40 PM, David Ranch wrote:
>>
>> Maybe a way to fix this is with a new parameter, say:
>>
>> # ax25_name min_obs def_qual worst_heard_qual verbose worst_calced_qual
>> 1 5 120 120 0 120
>>
>> --David
>
> If we're up for new parameters. I suggest a worst_quality_to_send. This is the issue as I see it. We're getting big lists from the internet, and the internet partners can handle them, but if you have any RF links, they'll be bombarded by a giant list of nodes in the broadcast. The user connects to a 1200 baud TNC, types "NODES" and the table is filled up with junk from far away. He falls asleep before the list finishes printing.
>
> We add a 'worst_quality_to_send' and then you can set a worst quality to send to each specific connection. Set your RF links to 255 and your IP connections to 1. That way the RF connections can get a tiny list of only the absolute most important stuff, but internet partners can get all the distant nodes. This is a pretty easy change to make. It's all in netromd and doesn't require any mucking with the kernel.
Nice idea, this outgoing filter.
But I see problems with worst_qual filters being different for each interface. Even more, if we'll have two (in and outbound).
Example:
A <-> B <-> INET-Host <-> C-in-inet
^ learned: INET-HOST, A, B
^ ^
learned:
only INET-Host
User on C-inet tries to connect A.
But A has not learned C-inet by B's broadcast and thus has no route to answer.
=> In the inet cloud there would be many nodes which are not reachable.
Where's the benefit?
Even worse, if you like to make IP:
you cannot manually connect from node to node; you depend on a working bi-directional l3 route.
vy 73,
- Thomas dl9sau
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom: Quality issue
2013-07-08 7:48 ` Thomas Osterried
@ 2013-07-08 13:24 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-08 13:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Osterried
Cc: David Ranch, Thomas Osterried, linux-hams, ralf@linux-mips.org Baechle
On 7/8/2013 12:48 AM, Thomas Osterried wrote:
>
> Nice idea, this outgoing filter.
>
> But I see problems with worst_qual filters being different for each interface. Even more, if we'll have two (in and outbound).
>
> Example:
>
>
> A <-> B <-> INET-Host <-> C-in-inet
>
> ^ learned: INET-HOST, A, B
> ^ ^
> learned:
> only INET-Host
>
>
> User on C-inet tries to connect A.
> But A has not learned C-inet by B's broadcast and thus has no route to answer.
Yeah, I see what you're saying. Really we do have this problem anyway,
though. I suppose. If a TNC sets its worst_quality to be high and
someone from that node connects in, there's no way to reply. When
worst_quality on a TNC is set high, the internet machine sends a giant
list of nodes over 1200 baud, and then the TNC would throw them all
away. If we could match these then the IP connected machine could avoid
putting all this extra stuff on the 1200 baud RF channel.
Maybe could be fixed with some kind of scheme that could set quality
based on traffic going through -- but the node broadcast would be too
late for a connect, so at least the first connect wouldn't get through.
> => In the inet cloud there would be many nodes which are not reachable.
> Where's the benefit?
>
Just that the massive node list on 1200 baud TNC is a poor user experience.
> Even worse, if you like to make IP:
> you cannot manually connect from node to node; you depend on a working bi-directional l3 route.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200
[not found] ` <1373314487.13641.19.camel@n1uro.ampr.org>
@ 2013-07-09 4:37 ` Cathryn Mataga
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Cathryn Mataga @ 2013-07-09 4:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: n1uro, linux-hams
>One thing that X1J/TheNet does that I would like to see linux do is
NOT rebroadcast nodes received on a particular >interface back out on
that same interface.
Hmm, interesting that this would be an issue. The Linux code does
ignore a node if its best neighbor is one's self. I wonder if there's
a degenerate case, if 3 nodes all have their default_quality set to 255,
where the 'neighbor' can all be the third station in the pair, and then
the node broadcast just goes around and around for all eternity because
the quality never decreases at all.
In this equation,
= ((quality * best_quality) + 128) /256;
Could it be that 128 is a mistake, in a world with so many ip based
systems that set default quality at a high value. Without the 128 then a
default_quality of 255 turn a 255 quality node into 254, so the infinite
loop would end eventually. If we don't want to touch the code, maybe
we should discourage anyone from ever setting a def_qual=255. That this
just seems likely to cause problems to me.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-09 4:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-07-06 4:19 Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200 Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 4:43 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 5:33 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 5:42 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 17:24 ` David Ranch
2013-07-06 18:32 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-06 20:28 ` Thomas Osterried
2013-07-07 5:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-07 6:08 ` Netrom: Quality issue Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-07 16:59 ` David Ranch
2013-07-07 18:45 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-08 3:40 ` David Ranch
2013-07-08 3:49 ` Cathryn Mataga
2013-07-08 7:48 ` Thomas Osterried
2013-07-08 13:24 ` Cathryn Mataga
[not found] <20130708115635.A4B233700A5@n1uro.ampr.org>
[not found] ` <51DABEDA.8020905@junglevision.com>
[not found] ` <1373314487.13641.19.camel@n1uro.ampr.org>
2013-07-09 4:37 ` Netrom on kernel version 3.9.6-200 Cathryn Mataga
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.