From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Sven Eckelmann Date: Mon, 07 May 2018 08:32:28 +0200 Message-ID: <2722022.Z6qn7ThOV8@bentobox> In-Reply-To: <20180506195559.32602-1-me@irrelefant.net> References: <20180506195559.32602-1-me@irrelefant.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2891995.nNjuQqpKoQ"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [RFC PATCH] batman-adv: mitigate issue when empty vlan is received List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org Cc: Leonardo =?ISO-8859-1?Q?M=F6rlein?= , Antonio Quartulli --nextPart2891995.nNjuQqpKoQ Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" On Sonntag, 6. Mai 2018 21:55:59 CEST Leonardo M=F6rlein wrote: > This patch is not a fix for the issue itself, but a fix for the > other nodes, which are also influenced by the issue. >=20 > - Some (affected) nodes send TT announcements for an empty vlan (for > now only seen with vlan_id =3D 0). > - This behaviour is a bug! Batman-adv nodes must not send TT > announcements for empty vlans. > - The receiving batman-adv can not handle incoming TT announcements > with empty vlans. (The crc check routine batadv_tt_global_check_crc() > fails.) > - As the receiving node thinks, the crc is broken, it does a full > table request then. > - The announcing node sends a TT full table to the receiving node > then, which also contains the empty vlan, so > *batadv_tt_global_check_crc()* fails again on the receiver side. > - This causes a lot of unneeded TT traffic. In Freifunk Hannover we > decreased the amount of from ~20kpp/s to ~4kpp/s on our supernodes. > We have ~800 nodes, which are connected via vpn to one of six > supernodes. Those supernodes are connected with each other in a fully > connected mesh. Can you attach a (small) pcap of actual traffic which show a packet which=20 triggers this behavior? Thanks, Sven --nextPart2891995.nNjuQqpKoQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEF10rh2Elc9zjMuACXYcKB8Eme0YFAlrv8vwACgkQXYcKB8Em e0bK6Q//THbbce2MVFFAUWlDbonix3ZZjy7Oi7/HYbnddr4YSHLTwlV+36+z4Gwu /O3t6qz3rXkzTwtBawSwBZ8bbl7zH2acdoVbr9ntwd6vLCBmw11hdnGVkeWrhPuT 8NaXES+Cb7zHl3VEOmqVHCZBv+zgizW+urzy82WAU/1471C1FTIs2HPSQ+tcQ155 wDcyFheQsEiso6v8FlWkufVapho8N5JfDyTt6Q32SfE9H4oMEJU8Gd8JK9EhLFAs LOkDHBlpBzfFG8FnCmKsqqIeUYZoqe3Dg4ARX4ND0pwpLcSLmc2nMim8NluHGoN4 9KV7/fBGsQjdzVt6vA1pv+6XEmng8p69GUL94m4WQP4+RK4gvOsMS2ZsSQIw7Ub9 acmthbA5aglBYIys4csj7jxb9jHuAtwoCGaNmovxVu61Zxvw3SKxZjHmpkgcFfFB jew9Vq0gS/XkDs1FkyFKuzRC0orpwssSlfh8a71MqkkhD3S4XfkSYtlzKR2kuPbI APVDQV9oXiD738nASsWlfSN1FbsfIYJbV7q/grHiiViJsbxjiII+6rqGyqR+9F/Y atBwG0pfj1IMoeE/rPUIJ0bP6Y2N2k9fVsc5ro/BVYPskimezAl7dqTL3zbu7ODd VI1wh5Pv4ZSHiyxNIXm0DTD4N17tJmuWJw7xUNeKkHMKyLH1Ww8= =QQR/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2891995.nNjuQqpKoQ--