[Babel-users] unicast branch test

[Dave Taht]

On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 1:12 PM Juliusz Chroboczek <jch at irif.fr> wrote:
>
> > since, what the heck, I have 7 different versions of babel in the lab,
> > I figured why not add in the unicast branch on two boxes and see what
> > else breaks.
>
> The unicast branch is obsolete -- the rfc6126bis branch is based of it.
> So if you're running rfc6126bis (or nlogn), you're already running the
> unicast code.

got it.

> As soon as I have some time, I'll release 1.8.4, then branch off a new
> babeld-1.8 branch for bug fixes, and then merge all of the other branches
> into master.  In the meantime, please run rfc6126bis only, and ignore all
> of the other branches.
>
> > An oddity, I think, is I see one box making a mh-request unicast, and
> > the other box seems to respond with a mcast (?).
>
> Perfectly legal and expected.
>
> > Is there fun, happy, new config options I can enable to enable way
> > more unicast? :)
>
> The unicast code does nothing by default.  To enable it, say
>
>   default unicast true
>
> in your config file.

yep, I RTFC'd. there's a need to update the man page so RTFM would work.

>
> > However, I now have enough lab boxes to basically do interop between
> > a lot of versions, I figure adding 1.5, 1.6, 1.7.1 to the mix would be
> > useful?
>
> At this stage, we're only interested in reports against:
>
>   - BIRD;
>   - rfc6126bis/xroute-nlogn, soon to be master;
>   - master, soon to be babeld-1.8

FRR is built, I just haven't got around to configuring it.
?

I did have to put one tiny segvio patch on that branch, I'll beat it
up without it for a while, see if I can make it happen again.

I really wanted to try unicast over some p2p links.

> If you're running older routers, make sure that you say
>
>   default rfc6126-compatible true

Almost not anymore!

> in the config file of the more recent branches.
>
> > and I *gotta* go climb a few trees.
>
> And put Babel routers on a few drones?  (Speak to Valent, in copy of this mail.)

I don't know if I mentioned this here or not, but this wifi bug:

http://blog.cerowrt.org/post/disabling_channel_scans/

was *physically* crashing a few drones, according the maker that contacted me.

I had thoughts towards trying flying drones over adhoc mode across
multiple routers,
but I think the default hold time on switching routes is not fast
enough, you can go out of
range in seconds.

If C&C were over multicast and everybody forwarded the packet
(discarding the dups) it might actually work, but...

... not today.

Jim and I long ago discussed the possibilities of connecting sailboats
up via adhoc & babel, which I think would work
great... but, climbing the mast is less fun than climbing trees.

> -- Juliusz



-- 

Dave Täht
CTO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-831-205-9740