No, we are running on batman-adv and it runs on layer-2 and encapsulates layer-2 ethernet frames.
This encapsulation costs a bit in terms of throughput but it's a big deal on mesh networks ;) -- Alessandro Bolletta Mediaspot S.r.l. -----Messaggio originale----- Da: Dave Taht [mailto:[email protected]] Inviato: lunedì 25 novembre 2013 19.27 A: Alessandro Bolletta Cc: [email protected] Oggetto: Re: [Codel] R: Jumbo frames with fq_codel On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Alessandro Bolletta <[email protected]> wrote: >>On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Alessandro Bolletta >><[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi guys, >> I'm working on an environment which runs on jumbo ethernet frames (about >> 1550bytes) and I would ask you if do you think that it's needed >a trick in >> order to correctly debloat interfaces as ath9k and ag71xx which carries such >> big frames. > >>I am under the impression that the ag71xx does not support jumbo frames. >>Slightly larger than usual frames? dunno. > > We are thinking to implement jumbo frames support on some devices > based on ag71xx :) Many SoCs support up to 2028 bytes or 4076 bytes of MTU > but the driver still can't manage MTUs higher than 1518bytes. It sounds like you are going down the path I went down about 7 years back in the WISP6 project. Back then I wanted to deliver a pure ipv6 backbone and encapsulate ipv4 traffic inside it at the normal 1500 MTU. I built hardware that worked with larger MTUs, and encountered more bugs in ipv6 encapsulation than I care to think about. Then I tried to change hardware because the manufacturer had canceled the product and ran into great difficulty finding a replacement. For the record, that device was this one, which supported 2028 bytes or so: http://www.embeddedarm.com/products/board-detail.php?product=TS-7250 >>the ath9k supports frames up to the size of the wireless standards >>(23xx bytes or so) > > Yes. > >>fq_codel's internal quantum is the actual ip packet size, not the wire size. >>at lower bandwidths it pays to have a lower quantum (like 300) on outgoing >>interfaces. > >>In openwrt the default on all interfaces is 300, which I dont necessarily >>agree with. > > Ok. I thought that codel would leverage on layer-2 parameters, as the size of > the ethernet frame. > >> >> Thanks >> >> -- >> Alessandro Bolletta >> Mediaspot S.r.l. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Codel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel > > > > -- > Dave Täht > > Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: > http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Codel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html _______________________________________________ Codel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/codel
