Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

>> Matthieu, do you understand why that is? Is there a way to optimise away >> conflict_solution in the easy case? > > I think so. Will fix it. The attached patch should solve the problem. As a conflict need a specific route, the first now loop iterates on specific routes only. If there is

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> The attached patch should solve the problem. Nice, applied. > +if(!check_specific_first()) > +fprintf(stderr, "Invariant failed: specific routes first in RIB.\n"); #ifdef DEBUG, or if(debug_level >= 2) ? -- Juliusz ___ Babel-users

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > Is there a reliable way of determining that an underlying interface is a > bridge? A local bridge/wifi? Sure... just look into the source of the brctl tool... it can give you a list of all bridge interfaces. A "wifi

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> #ifdef DEBUG, or if(debug_level >= 2) ? Well, I was not sure about this one. The problem with debug_level is that it produces too verbose output, it's not just "checks". I was rather thinking about having a test-mode version of babeld, which let the clean babeld-code as-is, and add some

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hi! But it will be more complicated with upgrades, and more complicated assuring that things are really the same (same patched version of Babel, same kernel version, TCP/IP stack, sysctl settings, etc.). Mitar On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> Matthieu, do you understand why that is? Is there a way to optimise away > conflict_solution in the easy case? I think so. Will fix it. I may call you before. Matthieu ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> Ok, I can do some profiling on the babeld that is running on the VPN >> server with the large number of links. Just tell me what profiling data >> do you want? Should I just compile a debug build and run

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

On 13 December 2015 at 22:00, Juliusz Chroboczek < j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> wrote: > >> Ok, I'll see on Monday if I can get an extra VM before Christmas. > > > > Which VM system are you using? We might be able to generate you a > > ready-made image. > > Please don't -- I'll let our system

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

>> Ok, I'll see on Monday if I can get an extra VM before Christmas. > > Which VM system are you using? We might be able to generate you a > ready-made image. Please don't -- I'll let our system administrators clone their usual VMWare image, it's better for everyone if I use what they're familiar

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

>> Oh, sadly not 75 max. The number of neighbours of one node is >> potentially very large, because all nodes with Internet uplink >> connects to the VPN server. So, all those nodes are then neighbours of >> that VPN server node. Currently this is for example 140 nodes on one > So yes, 75 is the

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hello! On 08. 12. 2015 17:58, Jernej Kos wrote: > We are still on the lookout for unparsable packets ;-) Got one! Couldn't parse packet (8, 14) from fe80::2ff:1bff:fe10:3d34 on digger1438. Packet dump: 08 0e 01 00 20 00 06 40 32 8e ff ff 0a fe 00 08 Jernej signature.asc Description:

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hi! Hm, I thought that Babel was tested on large networks and that it was tested on simulated large networks? Or are we now the largest network using it and this is why we are getting in all this trouble? So this is just another academic project which looks good on the paper but in practice it is

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> Hm, I thought that Babel was tested on large networks and that it was > tested on simulated large networks? Babel has been tested in one large network (1500 nodes). It took 20 minutes to converge, and worked fine after convergence time. I fixed the initial convergence issues (too many

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> Attaching some more dumps. Thanks, Kosko. These are all IPv4 retractions, and they look just fine to me. I'd need to see the full packet to be sure, but it probably means that there's some ambiguity in the code about handling retractions with no suitable next hop. I'll have a look when I

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

What about python scapy to generate bogus packets ? Saverio Il 08/dic/2015 18:01, "Dave Taht" ha scritto: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Jernej Kos wrote: > > Hello! > > > > On 07. 12. 2015 17:14, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > >> Yes, that's expected.

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hello! On 07. 12. 2015 17:14, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > Yes, that's expected. Please increase the limits, be bold, multiply them > by 20. It seems that raising the limits solved the problem. Thanks! We are still on the lookout for unparsable packets ;-) Jernej signature.asc Description:

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Jernej Kos wrote: > Hello! > > On 07. 12. 2015 17:14, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: >> Yes, that's expected. Please increase the limits, be bold, multiply them >> by 20. > > It seems that raising the limits solved the problem. Thanks! > > We are still

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hello! On 07. 12. 2015 10:16, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > How large is your network? How many routes through how many neighbours? It is around 550 routes and there is one node, which currently has 75 neighbours. Is this be enough to trigger the limits? Jernej signature.asc Description:

Re: [Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

> It is around 550 routes and there is one node, which currently has 75 > neighbours. Excellent. > Is this be enough to trigger the limits? Yes, that's expected. Please increase the limits, be bold, multiply them by 20. -- Juliusz ___ Babel-users

[Babel-users] Bucket full, dropping packet

Hello! I have recently discovered a lot of messages like the following in the babeld log: Warning: bucket full, dropping packet to digger1438. Warning: bucket full, dropping unicast packet to fe80::2ff:c3ff:fec1:a81c if digger1438. Warning: bucket full, dropping packet to digger1438. Any hints