[Babel-users] failing over faster?

[Dave Taht]

and when I bring the interface back up again (this is all babel from head)

ifconfig eth0 up

after it sees it... I get a 16 second gap rather than a 0 length one

64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=230 ttl=62 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=231 ttl=62 time=14.0 ms


64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=245 ttl=63 time=1.15 ms
64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=246 ttl=63 time=1.14 ms

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am fiddling with a rasberry pi3 with a usb ethernet (making it a
> 100mbit router), the onboard wifi, and 2 usb wifi sticks...
>
> with all the interfaces up I do a ping over ethernet
>
>
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=56 ttl=63 time=1.45 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=57 ttl=63 time=1.18 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=58 ttl=63 time=2.89 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=59 ttl=63 time=1.20 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=60 ttl=63 time=1.30 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=61 ttl=63 time=1.42 ms
>
> I do an
>
> ifconfig eth0 down # at this point, after a bit we get:
>
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
> ping: sendmsg: No route to host
>
> # and we fail over in 32 seconds
>
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=94 ttl=62 time=41.5 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=95 ttl=62 time=2.10 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=96 ttl=62 time=10.5 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=97 ttl=62 time=7.27 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=98 ttl=62 time=9.58 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=99 ttl=62 time=15.3 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=100 ttl=62 time=66.1 ms
> 64 bytes from 172.26.64.231: icmp_seq=101 ttl=63 time=7.73 ms
>
> but I was under the impression we'd fail over faster with -l on and
> we'd not get a "no route to host"
>
> (there are two hops on the mesh in the way...)
>
> babeld.conf
>
> default enable-timestamps true
> ipv6-subtrees true
> # eth1 is attached to a bridged wifi/wired network
> interface eth0 wired true link-quality false
> interface eth1 wired true link-quality true
> # All these adhoc interfaces suck compared to others on the network
> # and right now, all on 6
> diversity 3
> interface wlan1 channel 6
> interface wlan0 channel 6
> interface wlan2 channel 6
> out if wlan1 metric 512
> out if wlan0 metric 512
> out if wlan2 metric 512
> #I wanted to get hncp mesh addresses only (so as to be able to do ss
> #routing
> #redistribute local ::/128 eq 128 allow
> #redistribute local ::/64 gt 128 deny
> redistribute local deny
> # but ended up going with this for now
> redistribute proto 43 allow
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
> http://blog.cerowrt.org



-- 
Dave Täht
Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software!
http://blog.cerowrt.org