b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
@ 2011-01-28 22:46 Clemens John
  2011-01-29 17:45 ` Bjoern Franke
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Clemens John @ 2011-01-28 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: b.a.t.m.a.n

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1362 bytes --]

Hi,

I have a special question on confgurating our batman advanced setup.
We have a Tinc VPN on tap0, and behind this VPN is a dhcp server and an 
internet gateway which is reachable trough the ip 10.18.0.1.
On the router I have ath1, an adhoc wlan device, on which batman advanced is 
sending packagets. Now bat0 and tap0 are brindged to br-mesh. Like you can see 
in the configuration:

root@Floh:~# cat /etc/config/network 
[...]
config 'interface' 'mesh'
        option 'type' 'bridge'
        option 'ifname' 'bat0 tap0'
        option 'stp'    '1'
[...]

root@Floh:~# cat /etc/config/batman-adv 
config 'mesh' 'bat0'
        option 'interfaces' 'ath1'
        option 'orig_interval'
        option 'log_level'

                  [batman]      
[client]-->[adhoc ath1]-->[bat0][br-mesh][tap0]-->internet-->[gateway/dhcp]

Other nodes running the same configuration but not connecting trought vpn can 
connect to the dhcp server through batman advanced and the adhoc device.

If a client (laptop) without batman advanced tries to connect, it has no 
success because it does not get an I address.

What can I do?
I can not open a second wifi device in ap mode and add it to mesh. I know that 
this would be the best way but I´m trying this on an wrt54g and the b43 driver 
does not support multi essid.

Regards
Clemens

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-28 22:46 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface Clemens John
@ 2011-01-29 17:45 ` Bjoern Franke
  2011-01-29 18:00   ` Marek Lindner
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bjoern Franke @ 2011-01-29 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

Hi,

Am Freitag, den 28.01.2011, 23:46 +0100 schrieb Clemens John:

> What can I do?
> I can not open a second wifi device in ap mode and add it to mesh. I know that 
> this would be the best way but I´m trying this on an wrt54g and the b43 driver 
> does not support multi essid.

I think if we don't want to change back our configuration (batman-adv on
vpn with its mtu-problems etc.) the simplest way would be connecting a
usual router to the wrt54g.

regards
Bjoern 
-- 
jabber: bjo@schafweide.org
bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-29 17:45 ` Bjoern Franke
@ 2011-01-29 18:00   ` Marek Lindner
  2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marek Lindner @ 2011-01-29 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking


Hi,

> I think if we don't want to change back our configuration (batman-adv on
> vpn with its mtu-problems etc.) the simplest way would be connecting a
> usual router to the wrt54g.

I don't think the VPN is the problem here but the fact that you can't bridge 
an interface running in adhoc mode. Ad-hoc is "lacks" a field in the wifi header 
which makes bridging impossible.
However, I agree with your proposed solution - another router connected to the 
Ethernet of the wrt54g can solve the issue.

Regards,
Marek

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-29 18:00   ` Marek Lindner
@ 2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
  2011-02-01  5:49       ` wayne
                         ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Clemens John @ 2011-01-31 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 901 bytes --]

Am Samstag 29 Januar 2011, 19:00:50 schrieb Marek Lindner:
> Hi,
> 
> > I think if we don't want to change back our configuration (batman-adv on
> > vpn with its mtu-problems etc.) the simplest way would be connecting a
> > usual router to the wrt54g.
> 
> I don't think the VPN is the problem here but the fact that you can't
> bridge an interface running in adhoc mode. Ad-hoc is "lacks" a field in
> the wifi header which makes bridging impossible.
> However, I agree with your proposed solution - another router connected to
> the Ethernet of the wrt54g can solve the issue.

This is not possible in this case (I don´t have another router).

Is there onother (maybe harder) way or a hack to do get the same result like 
when bridging two interfaces? Maybe with iptables?

Or does anyone know what the status of multiple ssid on wrt54g with kernel 2.6 
is?

Regards
Clemens

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
@ 2011-02-01  5:49       ` wayne
  2011-02-01 10:51       ` Kevin Steen
  2011-02-01 12:12       ` Bjoern Franke
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: wayne @ 2011-02-01  5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

Clemens John wrote:
> Am Samstag 29 Januar 2011, 19:00:50 schrieb Marek Lindner:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> I think if we don't want to change back our configuration (batman-adv on
>>> vpn with its mtu-problems etc.) the simplest way would be connecting a
>>> usual router to the wrt54g.
>> I don't think the VPN is the problem here but the fact that you can't
>> bridge an interface running in adhoc mode. Ad-hoc is "lacks" a field in
>> the wifi header which makes bridging impossible.
>> However, I agree with your proposed solution - another router connected to
>> the Ethernet of the wrt54g can solve the issue.
> 
> This is not possible in this case (I don´t have another router).
> 
> Is there onother (maybe harder) way or a hack to do get the same result like 
> when bridging two interfaces? Maybe with iptables?
> 
> Or does anyone know what the status of multiple ssid on wrt54g with kernel 2.6 
> is?
> 
> Regards
> Clemens


IIRC, this is not a software problem, this is a limitation with the 
hardware radio device, so I wouldnt hold my breath.

Wayne A



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
  2011-02-01  5:49       ` wayne
@ 2011-02-01 10:51       ` Kevin Steen
  2011-02-04 15:38         ` Clemens John
  2011-02-01 12:12       ` Bjoern Franke
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Steen @ 2011-02-01 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

On 31/01/11 18:32, Clemens John wrote:
> Am Samstag 29 Januar 2011, 19:00:50 schrieb Marek Lindner:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> I think if we don't want to change back our configuration (batman-adv on
>>> vpn with its mtu-problems etc.) the simplest way would be connecting a
>>> usual router to the wrt54g.
>> I don't think the VPN is the problem here but the fact that you can't
>> bridge an interface running in adhoc mode. Ad-hoc is "lacks" a field in
>> the wifi header which makes bridging impossible.
>> However, I agree with your proposed solution - another router connected to
>> the Ethernet of the wrt54g can solve the issue.
> This is not possible in this case (I don´t have another router).
>
> Is there onother (maybe harder) way or a hack to do get the same result like
> when bridging two interfaces? Maybe with iptables?
>
> Or does anyone know what the status of multiple ssid on wrt54g with kernel 2.6
> is?
>
> Regards
> Clemens
If your non-batman clients don't need incoming connections, you could 
NAT outgoing connections :
   [client]-->[adhoc ath1]-->NAT-->[br-mesh]
You would have to run a DHCP server on the ath1 interface to give those 
clients a private IP and tell them to use the private IP on ath1 as 
their router.

-Kevin

---
Have a vacancy for a Network Engineer/IT guy in London, UK? Please let me know.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
  2011-02-01  5:49       ` wayne
  2011-02-01 10:51       ` Kevin Steen
@ 2011-02-01 12:12       ` Bjoern Franke
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bjoern Franke @ 2011-02-01 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

Hi,

> > I don't think the VPN is the problem here but the fact that you can't
> > bridge an interface running in adhoc mode. Ad-hoc is "lacks" a field in
> > the wifi header which makes bridging impossible.
> > However, I agree with your proposed solution - another router connected to
> > the Ethernet of the wrt54g can solve the issue.
> 
> This is not possible in this case (I don´t have another router).

Does Franco have another router which he could connect to the wrt54g? 

> Is there onother (maybe harder) way or a hack to do get the same result like 
> when bridging two interfaces? Maybe with iptables?

I think this would break our setup.

> Or does anyone know what the status of multiple ssid on wrt54g with kernel 2.6 
> is?

Maybe we should ask here:
http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers/b43#support

I have no experience with brcm-chips due to I have only a brcm4318 in my
laptop.

regards
Bjoern
-- 
jabber: bjo@schafweide.org
bjo.nord-west.org | nord-west.org | freifunk-ol.de


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-02-01 10:51       ` Kevin Steen
@ 2011-02-04 15:38         ` Clemens John
  2011-02-06 22:18           ` Kevin Steen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Clemens John @ 2011-02-04 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 486 bytes --]

Am Dienstag 01 Februar 2011, 11:51:16 schrieben Sie:
> If your non-batman clients don't need incoming connections, you could
> NAT outgoing connections :
>    [client]-->[adhoc ath1]-->NAT-->[br-mesh]
> You would have to run a DHCP server on the ath1 interface to give those
> clients a private IP and tell them to use the private IP on ath1 as
> their router.

What do I have do insert into iptables to NAT ath1 to br-mesh? I´m a complete 
firewall noob.

Regards
Clemens

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-02-04 15:38         ` Clemens John
@ 2011-02-06 22:18           ` Kevin Steen
  2011-02-08 23:37             ` Clemens John
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Steen @ 2011-02-06 22:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

On 04/02/11 15:38, Clemens John wrote:
> Am Dienstag 01 Februar 2011, 11:51:16 schrieben Sie:
>> If your non-batman clients don't need incoming connections, you could
>> NAT outgoing connections :
>>     [client]-->[adhoc ath1]-->NAT-->[br-mesh]
>> You would have to run a DHCP server on the ath1 interface to give those
>> clients a private IP and tell them to use the private IP on ath1 as
>> their router.
> What do I have do insert into iptables to NAT ath1 to br-mesh? I´m a complete
> firewall noob.
There might be an easier way using the config files of the distribution 
you're using, but from a script it would look something like this:

#! /bin/sh
modprobe iptable_nat
## Work-around for bad ISPs which drop ICMP Fragmentation Needed 
packets: (Needs to be early in list)
iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS 
--clamp-mss-to-pmtu
iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o br-mesh -j MASQUERADE

-Kevin


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface
  2011-02-06 22:18           ` Kevin Steen
@ 2011-02-08 23:37             ` Clemens John
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Clemens John @ 2011-02-08 23:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1556 bytes --]

Am Sonntag 06 Februar 2011, 23:18:25 schrieben Sie:
> On 04/02/11 15:38, Clemens John wrote:
> > Am Dienstag 01 Februar 2011, 11:51:16 schrieben Sie:
> >> If your non-batman clients don't need incoming connections, you could
> >> 
> >> NAT outgoing connections :
> >>     [client]-->[adhoc ath1]-->NAT-->[br-mesh]
> >> 
> >> You would have to run a DHCP server on the ath1 interface to give those
> >> clients a private IP and tell them to use the private IP on ath1 as
> >> their router.
> > 
> > What do I have do insert into iptables to NAT ath1 to br-mesh? I´m a
> > complete firewall noob.
> 
> There might be an easier way using the config files of the distribution
> you're using, but from a script it would look something like this:
> 
> #! /bin/sh
> modprobe iptable_nat
> ## Work-around for bad ISPs which drop ICMP Fragmentation Needed
> packets: (Needs to be early in list)
> iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS
> --clamp-mss-to-pmtu
> iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o br-mesh -j MASQUERADE
> 
> -Kevin

Thank you that got me a little bit further.
But now the traffic from the wlan client (wlan0) gets into the router (br-mesh) 
and tries to reach the internet over the default route of the router, my local 
lan port. But I want to Use a special gateway (10.18.0.1) behind the vpn and 
in the same network as br-mesh, only for traffic comming from the clients. Traffic 
comming from the router itself should use the default gateway furthermore.

What can I do?

Regards
Clemens

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-08 23:37 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-01-28 22:46 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Connecting through Batman advanced interface Clemens John
2011-01-29 17:45 ` Bjoern Franke
2011-01-29 18:00   ` Marek Lindner
2011-01-31 18:32     ` Clemens John
2011-02-01  5:49       ` wayne
2011-02-01 10:51       ` Kevin Steen
2011-02-04 15:38         ` Clemens John
2011-02-06 22:18           ` Kevin Steen
2011-02-08 23:37             ` Clemens John
2011-02-01 12:12       ` Bjoern Franke

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).