AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batmand-exp test in the developing world

We experienced ~ 200% increase in cpu efficiency and ~ 300% in network efficiency between 0.4.10 and 0.5.4. c.f. http://olsr.funkfeuer.at for graphs. Wow - you are part of the marketing team ? I guess B.A.T.M.A.N. has over 1000% increase in efficiency between 0.01 and now. ;-) I'm sorry

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batmand-exp test in the developing world

On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 12:53:13AM +, Marek Lindner wrote: [..snip..] I'm sorry to say that 0.3beta is not usable at the moment. and my tests with 0.3-beta_~rv720 showed path-detection pretty broken Well, rev720 is almost 3 weeks old. During that time the new routing algo was

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batmand-exp test in the developing world

Hello Jan - indeed, your report is the wage for our work. Your application is one of our prime targets. Cheers! cu elektra

[B.A.T.M.A.N.] Experiences with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767

We playing around with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767 in our leipziger Freifunk-testing-Firmware (based on v1.6.10): the Routing works fine (if i start batmand eth1:bat vlan1:bat) - great work! but the gateway-function (option -r 2) drives me mad: * why the tunnel-interface (gateX) now have

Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batmand-exp test in the developing world

I'm sorry to say that 0.3beta is not usable at the moment. and my tests with 0.3-beta_~rv720 showed path-detection pretty broken Well, rev720 is almost 3 weeks old. During that time the new routing algo was quite unstable. Did you also try the newer snapshots ? On Tue, Oct

AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Experiences with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767

Hi, We playing around with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767 in our leipziger Freifunk-testing-Firmware (based on v1.6.10): the Routing works fine (if i start batmand eth1:bat vlan1:bat) - great work! exciting to hear. Keep us informed about all the trouble you experience so that we can work on

AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] batmand-exp test in the developing world

We'll post a message to the list as soon as we think it is fixed and worth a try. i never saw that post (maybe i missed it?), so i only tested exp-0.3 :) Right - i think it is ready to be tested now. @Elektra: What about activating my latest routing improvement ? Heute schon

[B.A.T.M.A.N.] ideas for 0.3

One more idea: How about forwarding the average TQ-Value of the best ranking neighbor instead of the actual incoming value? This should avoid inconsistency amongst TQ-Values to a great degree! cu elektra We'll post a message to the list as soon as we think it is fixed and worth a try.

AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] ideas for 0.3

How about forwarding the average TQ-Value of the best ranking neighbor instead of the actual incoming value? This should avoid inconsistency amongst TQ-Values to a great degree! That is what we do now ! It is the reason for the 10 seconds loops. Therefore I proposed to forward the

AW: AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Experiences with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767

May be we have to set the source address explicitely. I look into that. I issued a patch. Could you test that for me (rev 779) ? At the moment I can't do it myself. Regards, Marek Machen Sie Yahoo! zu Ihrer Startseite. Los geht's: http://de.yahoo.com/set

Re: AW: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] Experiences with B.A.T.M.A.N. 0.3-beta rv767

Hi On Sonntag 04 November 2007, Marek Lindner wrote: ... The batman gateway checks if the tunnelled packet has a known wifi IP address corresponding to a known virtual IP address. 104.61.13.37 is obviously a wrong IP address. I would guess that this is an OLSR address ? May be we have a