From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 11 08:08:44 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AEBF106566B; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:08:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from monthadar@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8F88FC0C; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf19 with SMTP id 19so2216676wyf.13 for ; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:08:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=KAtirXgTFn1tZySJhzYBzNaivMuYx5BO0m01CAAUcAg=; b=C30YAB2kSwE2j35J80qg4ceeyaG4PjNYYF/Vm/mp0SHxRPAGM11ZU8yOZITa+1tDNB B2Ghcs3yFbKnWyPSzVVzhlaLXeFIXToPVVOWeBAxvGLJY7Mi4pklcXEEQksMr0OySg32 siHanLu7d4nBIcbcrfIqr+sNFQ9Ewnxb0J+DU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=nDiWdyESquTreZyOURpzI7NemkgNyqXHjYDd0RQDjU2rc5BEPNZGdd+ccTq23rnoWr d4Cmn08L2P/KOLun723lQsisrGuE23iR5lOXFZH725GFYi1C9l1wqCxMKESuiF6Ql6/A 3H+VCYGx7Y3hPDAZmY5ICyvr2htv+itD8YxMw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.157.9 with SMTP id z9mr167228wbw.79.1297411722748; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:08:42 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.134.137 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:08:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <201102101119.07350.bschmidt@freebsd.org> <201102101209.19983.bschmidt@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 09:08:42 +0100 Message-ID: From: Monthadar Al Jaberi To: bschmidt@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 80211s HWMP problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:08:44 -0000 On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Monthadar Al Jaberi wrote: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: >> On Thursday, February 10, 2011 11:42:05 Monthadar Al Jaberi wrote: >>> Okej, I run all four scenarios: >>> >>> 0->2 OK, but the first "ping -c 1" got lost >>> 1->3 OK, >>> 2->0 OK, >>> 3->1 FAIL, works after "ping -c 1" 1->2 >>> >>> looks like path is built correct in one way only? :S >> >> I have no clue about the mesh code.. but, that smells like there are a >> few frames discard which are supposed to fill the ARP table. Can I talk >> you into dumping frames on the interfaces to figure out where those >> discards happen? > > please :) Sorry, but what was it you want me to dump? > >> >>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Bernhard Schmidt >> wrote: >>> > On Thursday, February 10, 2011 11:06:41 Monthadar Al Jaberi wrote: >>> >> Hej, wanna check if anyone encountered this problem: >>> >> I setup 4 mesh nodes in a link topology ( 0 <-> 1 <-> 2 <-> 3) >>> >> >>> >> But I cant ping from 3 to 0, or 0 to 3, without first ping between >>> >> the nodes to fill the hwmp route tables. >>> > >>> > Pinging 0 -> 2, 1 -> 3, 2 -> 0 and 3 -> 1 on freshly started nodes >>> > works though? >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Bernhard >> >> -- >> Bernhard >> > > > > -- > //Monthadar Al Jaberi > -- //Monthadar Al Jaberi