Re: [Cerowrt-devel] eero gains competition in plumewifi
(resent, wrong sender address at first send) On 06/20/2016 09:16 AM, Dave Taht wrote: I sure wish I knew how they are implementing diversity routing and if they are bothering to pay attention to make-wifi-fast https://www.plumewifi.com/ Quite a staffing for a startup, the web site lists 46 names and positions from which 26 are named as engineers. Wondering if they already are in the business of WiFi chip and RF engineering, which enable them to do some "magic" to make a network of their own from the plumewifi plugs. On staffing resources this isn't on par with Eero, I think. - Erkki ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] eero gains competition in plumewifi
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > I sure wish I knew how they are implementing diversity routing and if > they are bothering to pay attention to make-wifi-fast > > https://www.plumewifi.com/ "Plume is a cloud coordinated WiFi system that exponentially increases the signal strength and quality of your WiFi. It monitors your WiFi activity and balances your network load without sacrificing the performance of one device over another. Plume utilizes multiple WiFi channels in the same home to communicate between Plume Pods, eliminating congestion as your WiFi demands change and increase. Our cloud algorithms figure out which band to use for each device to ensure your devices have access to the speed they deserve, avoiding interference along the way. Plume WiFi adapts to the physical space you live in, your online devices, your household, and even to your neighbor’s WiFi usage patterns (yes, their networks also impact your environment!). It adapts real-time to your personal needs." I'm reading this as: we setup the APs on all 3 (1,6,11) channels, have the plumes record which channels have best radio and network parameters at a given time; store that on their disks over the web (sorry, cloud); then dynamically set power and perhaps other radio chip and QoS parameters to something a la heuristics: e.g. send X type of traffic on ch11 after 6pm Mon-Fri. Doesn't sound like they're making wifi fast in Dave Taht sense. More like working around the issues by multiplying channels and squeezing what they can from the radio. That may work, who knows. Anyway, this is what a consumer like me reads it. Best regards, Maciej > > > -- > Dave Täht > Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! > http://blog.cerowrt.org > ___ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] eero gains competition in plumewifi
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Maciej Soltysiak wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 8:16 AM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> I sure wish I knew how they are implementing diversity routing and if >> they are bothering to pay attention to make-wifi-fast >> >> https://www.plumewifi.com/ > > > "Plume is a cloud coordinated WiFi system that exponentially increases the > signal strength and quality of your WiFi. It monitors your WiFi activity and > balances your network load without sacrificing the performance of one device > over another. Plume utilizes multiple WiFi channels in the same home to > communicate between Plume Pods, eliminating congestion as your WiFi demands > change and increase. I love how marketing folk can eliminate congestion with a wave of a word processor. > Our cloud algorithms figure out which band to use for > each device to ensure your devices have access to the speed they deserve, > avoiding interference along the way. Plume WiFi adapts to the physical space > you live in, your online devices, your household, and even to your > neighbor’s WiFi usage patterns (yes, their networks also impact your > environment!). It adapts real-time to your personal needs." I am glad they sort of recognise that oh, my, merely because you have a WPA password does not stop you from radiating outside your home/apt. The fact that this needs an ! to point out is a sad commentary on the state of humanity. > I'm reading this as: we setup the APs on all 3 (1,6,11) channels, have the > plumes record which channels have best radio and network parameters at a > given time; store that on their disks over the web (sorry, cloud); then > dynamically set power and perhaps other radio chip and QoS parameters to > something a la heuristics: e.g. send X type of traffic on ch11 after 6pm > Mon-Fri. I have no idea why "the cloud" is needed, as the amount of storage and computation required to do this fits into a few dozen k. Well, what I can imagine is the radios sending a constant stream of statistics to the cloud (thus leaking who is on, when), giant databases written in python to manage it, plume reselling your usage data and patterns to third parties, a whole team dedicated to developing the json api to manage all this, and the gui for your smart phone relying on hole punching to get the conf data out to the cloud, so the json api controlling the parameters could make it back into the device over unsecured telnet over port 22. ... and one or two guys cross compiling openwrt and crossing their fingers if it will work in the shipped part of the product, and utterly ignoring rfc7084 and homenet in developing their sort of meshy technology. Of all the things in the preso that bugged me most, it was their proposal for you to throw out all your existing APs for their stuff, and secondly not documenting how to interop with the real open source software they are probably leveraging. Welcome to our silo! Trust us, we fixed everything you've been bugged about! Thanks for supporting us on kickstarter! > Doesn't sound like they're making wifi fast in Dave Taht sense. More like > working around the issues by multiplying channels and squeezing what they > can from the radio. That may work, who knows. One of these days I should stress more that the inverse square law for radio propagation *vastly* trumps anything we can do in make-wifi-fast, that we 'canna violate the laws of physics, captain!' No matter what I try for example, the make-wifi-fast AP I have in the office cannot reach the kitchen. So I have definately longed to see the end of your typical wifi "repeater" that rebroadcast on the same channel, and I would also have liked it if some "meshy" 2 radio diversity routing product that plugged into a wall like these things do... also had ethernet over powerline support. *way* better answer that wifi diversity routing is in many cases. > Anyway, this is what a consumer like me reads it. This non-consumer woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. > Best regards, > Maciej > > > >> >> >> >> -- >> Dave Täht >> Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! >> http://blog.cerowrt.org >> ___ >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list >> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] eero gains competition in plumewifi
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 1:28 AM, Erkki Lintunen wrote: > (resent, wrong sender address at first send) > > On 06/20/2016 09:16 AM, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> I sure wish I knew how they are implementing diversity routing and if >> they are bothering to pay attention to make-wifi-fast >> >> https://www.plumewifi.com/ > > > > Quite a staffing for a startup, the web site lists 46 names and positions > from which 26 are named as engineers. Wondering if they already are in the > business of WiFi chip and RF engineering, which enable them to do some > "magic" to make a network of their own from the plumewifi plugs. On staffing > resources this isn't on par with Eero, I think. Well, it seems that post-nest there was a wave of VC investment into making "quality" things that could be made hi-margin as market demand (and consumer foolishness) was demonstrated to exist, by that. Certainly wifi APs were ripe for improvements... and my own bias towards fixing the standards and making the main APs better (e.g. ISP-supplied or open source capable) a slower path. The actual overheads for a company of building a shippable product (e.g. marketing resources, manufacturing, structured testing, software and hardware development, etc) I've long recognized, but I would have loved to have actually had this sort of backing to go and develop a product that worked right in the first place, long ago, and ship it. And be making a living while doing so. I guess I'm jealous. I really hadn't hit on the idea of the bundled, multiple AP approach as restoring margins enough for new ideas to make it to productization. (I still think the all or nothing silo approach is a hard sell, even for the classic enterprise AP vendors). eero has published their GPL'd sources, at least, and this is the latest of a string of products that promised way too much for what they can possibly deliver on first ship. I keep hoping the onhub will improve, but so far, it hasn't. And then there are so many failed attempts with under-staffed over-promised products that have been through kickstarter. Ah, well, maybe this time these boxes will be be better in a demonstrable way. Hope springs eternal. > - Erkki > ___ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Eric Johansson wrote: > I assume you've seen this list https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Ath9k > > I'm starting to play with mikrotek devices. routeros is a consultants > full employment program so replacing it would be nice. I *knew* I was in the wrong business and backing the wrong play here. It is long past time that I start taking advantage of broken window economics. It would keep a roof over my head and the lights on, and affect the economy less, as building systems that worked well more of the time, as we keep trying to do here, would put so many out of work. > --- eric > > On 6/21/2016 2:36 AM, Dave Taht wrote: >> http://wrtnode.com/w/ >> >> ... >> >> What I am actually looking for is the smallest/cheapest minimum >> possible box with an ath9k in it. >> >> > > ___ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
Let me know how things go. I'd be interested in sponsoring (or at least helping to provide hardware for) this sort of work. I'm most interested in the crs125 or similar series of switches, it looks like a good number of their devices are supported already. David Lang On Tue, 21 Jun 2016, Eric Johansson wrote: I assume you've seen this list https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Ath9k I'm starting to play with mikrotek devices. routeros is a consultants full employment program so replacing it would be nice. --- eric On 6/21/2016 2:36 AM, Dave Taht wrote: http://wrtnode.com/w/ ... What I am actually looking for is the smallest/cheapest minimum possible box with an ath9k in it. ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
I assume you've seen this list https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Ath9k I'm starting to play with mikrotek devices. routeros is a consultants full employment program so replacing it would be nice. --- eric On 6/21/2016 2:36 AM, Dave Taht wrote: > http://wrtnode.com/w/ > > ... > > What I am actually looking for is the smallest/cheapest minimum > possible box with an ath9k in it. > > ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
On 6/21/2016 3:02 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Eric Johansson wrote: >> I assume you've seen this list https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Ath9k >> >> I'm starting to play with mikrotek devices. routeros is a consultants >> full employment program so replacing it would be nice. > I *knew* I was in the wrong business and backing the wrong play here. > It is long past time that I start taking advantage of broken window > economics. It would keep a roof over my head and the lights on, and > affect the economy less, as building systems that worked well more of > the time, as we keep trying to do here, would put so many out of work. Assuming I can find enough consulting work, I want to spend some time building a better way of interfacing with these devices. The vendor supplied web interface is equivalent to someone giving you a big pile parts and saying, here's a low-cost car, You just need to put it together yourself. I want to focus on a task oriented interface where its notation is built on what we as network developers use, not what the capabilities of the device are. I did before with IP cop, I think I can do it again for more complex device. If I do it right, it should be able to be a good interface for any switch/firewall. for too long, people have made network infrastructure device user interfaces complicated. It's time to make them simple. ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] ipv6 not quite working for me on internal networks
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Simon Dalley wrote: > On 17/06/16 15:21, Dave Taht wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Simon Dalley >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> First, thanks for all the work to make cerowrt what it is. >> >> Was. I am really encouraging everyone to update to lede at this point, >> which has nearly everything that was "good" about cerowrt in it. > > Well, the nice thing about cerowrt "was" its improved list of setup defaults > vs. openwrt, not least the routed-instead-of-bridged subnets which is so > helpful on mixed wired/wireless. Has this been carried over into lede? Is > there a recommended cerowrt-flavoured git branch in lede? No, and no. I've gotten quite fast on unbridging stuff by hand, but decided that it was too lonely in the general case to do more than follow the herd on this front, at least for when I was not actively testing wifi's multicast behaviors. One of the "big ideas" in cerowrt was to rename interfaces on creation and before they came up by their security model (gXXX for guest, sXXX for secure) so that there could be a stateless firewall that you'd never have to reload, and would never be vulnerable for an instant. It used pattern matching so you could bring up a "s+" rule and have iptables match all that all the time, and have interfaces come and go underneath it. Among other things this meant you'd never break conntracking for nailed up nat connections. Nobody bought into that - even after going through hell on interfaces and ipv6 addresses coming and going, triggering so many firewall reloads that the default openwrt system was basically useless at one point in it's development, the answer was to rate limit firewall changes and keep the loose coupling between a bridge/firewall "interface" and reality... and I'd never got anywhere on renaming vlans properly, so I gave up. Nowadays the systemd folk are off creating memorable, distinct names for interfaces, like a new random usb+mac hash for enx029b514afb6f for what used to be called usb0, enp2s0 for what was eth2, and so on. This does not strike me as an improvement, either. It was primarily not being able to figure out how to map "eth0.2" into se00 and eth0.3 into ge01 portion of the pattern matching problem that caused me to give up on the "cerowall" design. https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/CeroWall/ I have some hope (but only some) that nftables might straighten some of this out. I have mildly more hope that the iptables rules will gain chains and filter out protocols by frequency, one day, at least. >>> I am having some difficulty with ipv6 on the "last hop", namely my >>> internal >>> network. >>> >>> Platform: Netgear WNDR3800 >>> Cerowrt version: CeroWrt Toronto 3.10.50-1 / LuCI Trunk (svn-r10459) >>> >>> AQUISS, my UK ISP, provides an ipv6 address range: >>> IPv6 Address 20xx::xx55:ae00::/56 >> >> Are you getting this via dhcp-pd or is it static? > > I had set the Network | Interfaces | GE00 check box "Enable IPv6 negotiation > on the PPP link" and the options below for the WAN6 interface, but that > didn't seem to do anything. Only when I added an explicit value for the > "ipv6prefix" option did any global ipv6 addresses appear. In > /etc/config/networks: > config interface 'wan6' > option ifname '@ge00' > option proto 'dhcpv6' > option broadcast '1' > option metric '2048' > option reqprefix '56' > option reqaddress 'try' > option ip6prefix '20xx::xx55:ae00::/56' > > config interface 'ge00' > option _orig_ifname 'ge00' > option _orig_bridge 'false' > option ifname 'ge00' > option proto 'pppoe' > option ipv6 '1' > option username 'xx...@aquiss.com' > option password 'x' > option mtu '1458' I am sorry but I am confused, is this a 6rd device? I regret that I do not know anyone that tested pppoe in this scenario. > >>> Recommended MTU: 1458 bytes >>> >>> I can make ipv6 work when connecting PC host "centaur" directly to the >>> cable >>> modem and running pppd. ping6 ipv6.google.com etc works fine. >> >> The "cable" modem is running over ppp??? > > Sorry, I shouldn't have just glibly said "cable modem". It's actually a FTTC > DSL modem, serving via PPPoE. When I was trying it directly from the PC, I > set it up using pppoeconf under ubuntu. >>> >>> Reconnecting via the WNDR3800, everything ipv4 related works fine with >>> "centaur" on the se00 subnet. >>> >>> I can also ping6 without problems from the WNDR3800: >>>root@cerowrt:~# ping6 ipv6.google.com >>>PING ipv6.google.com (2a00:1450:4009:80f::200e): 56 data bytes >>>64 bytes from 2a00:1450:4009:80f::200e: seq=0 ttl=53 time=15.576 ms >>>64 bytes from 2a00:1450:4009:80f::200e: seq=1 ttl=53 time=14.959 ms >>>64 bytes from 2a00:1450:4009:80f::200e: seq=2 ttl=53 time=15.156 ms >>>64 bytes from 2a00:1450:4009:80f::200e: seq=3 ttl=53 time=15.044 ms >>>^C >>>--- ipv6.google.com ping statistics --- >>>4 packets tr
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:59:12 -0400 Eric Johansson wrote: > I'm starting to play with mikrotek devices. routeros is a consultants > full employment program so replacing it would be nice. Are they still lying about GPL. Mikrotik used to have several kernel drivers which they label as GPL (to access symbols), but there was no source available. ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
[Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: [LEDE-DEV] apu2 + Candela firmware/driver LEDE tree is available.
the apu2 has been my main target for a while. I am running ubuntu on mine for ease of debugging, which required I put in a msata card and fiddle a bit. I am not trying to make it a full fledged openwrt device as yet... ... but ben just did (presumably can boot off a sdcard, which would be cheaper than msata). I am going to stop cross posting stuff from lede or to lede from now on, also. -- Forwarded message -- From: Ben Greear Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:45 PM Subject: [LEDE-DEV] apu2 + Candela firmware/driver LEDE tree is available. To: LEDE Development List In case someone wants to try out my patches by just cloning a tree: https://github.com/greearb/lede-source-ct The README has some notes on how to easily build for the 'apu2' platform, and normal build infrastructure is supported as well. I am likely to rebase this often as I have time to sync with upstream. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ___ Lede-dev mailing list lede-...@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
[Cerowrt-devel] beaglebone green wireless boards now available
I just got two of 'em and getting usbnet up was a snap. I got 'em because they have dual 2.4ghz 802.11n antennas and I figured the wifi would be faster than the getchip stuff. (there is no adhoc support. another reason for looking at this board is to look at the structure of the drivers for make-wifi-fast) I have long liked the beaglebones as being a well built product, with some special features like the onboard PRUs nothing else can match. The cpu is getting a bit long in the tooth tho, and these wireless ones (no ethernet!) are so new that cases don't exist for them yet. https://www.amazon.com/Seeedstudio-BeagleBone-Green-Wireless-Bluetooth/dp/B01GKE8F10/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1466552623&sr=8-1&keywords=beaglebone+green+wireless they boot up (pretty fast) with debian jesse, kernel 4.4.9-ti-r25, on the onboard 4GB emmc flash chip. I was unaware until this moment that debian jesse appears to be shipping babeld 1.5.1. The preinstalled OS has sufficient compiler and onboard flash space to build a current babeld from git, and I'm happy to report IPV6_SUBTREES is compiled in by default. As for whether or not I'll end up going through the same hell I'm going through elsewhere, too soon to tell. -- Dave Täht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
Re: [Cerowrt-devel] anyone tried a wrtnode?
> On 21 Jun, 2016, at 22:08, Eric Johansson wrote: > > I want to focus on a task oriented interface where its notation is built > on what we as network developers use, not what the capabilities of the > device are. I did before with IP cop, I think I can do it again for more > complex device. If I do it right, it should be able to be a good > interface for any switch/firewall. > > for too long, people have made network infrastructure device user > interfaces complicated. It's time to make them simple. I may have some ideas on that score… - Jonathan Morton ___ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
