ma infatti il non era per confrontare le prestazioni (mesh wireless) vs (tinc via internet)
era per confrontare (internet) vs (tinc via internet) Il 03 luglio 2011 14:14, Antonio Quartulli <or...@autistici.org> ha scritto: > On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 01:57:00 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote: >> senza tinc la configurazione rimane uguale ma il traffico al posto di >> passare dal tunnel via internet passa solo attraverso i link wireless > > scusa e come fai a confrontare i due valori se li fai passare da > infrastrutture diverse? > on puoi fare un test fra gli stessi endpoint peròpassando attraverso > internet? se i due si ragigungono per connettersi con tinc potranno > anche raggiungersi per far connettere iperf, no? > >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:51, Antonio Quartulli <or...@autistici.org> ha scritto: >> > On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 01:48:37 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote: >> >> il test e' sempre PC( iperf -c ) <-- cavo lan --> Piconstation ( >> >> btman-adv + tinc )<-- tinc ---> PC( batman-adv + tinc + iperf -s) >> > >> > anche senza TINC la configurazione rimane uguale? scusa ma non ho capito >> > questo daalle mail precedenti >> > >> >> >> >> >usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo >> >> >deviati.. >> >> >> >> quei test non sono fatti in parallelo sono fatti in modo sequenziale >> >> quindi volta per volta c'e' ne e' attivo solo uno >> >> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:40, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: >> >> > Magari se scegliessi un test "unico" sarebbe anche meglio, >> >> > usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo >> >> > deviati.. >> >> > Se non mi dicessi della CPU a palla, guardando sta roba ti direi che è >> >> > congestione.. >> >> > >> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:31, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >> >> altra serie di test >> >> >> >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.8 sec 384 KBytes 167 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.5 sec 384 KBytes 180 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.0 sec 384 KBytes 157 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.1 sec 384 KBytes 149 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-32.3 sec 384 KBytes 97.3 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.8 sec 384 KBytes 151 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-27.7 sec 256 KBytes 75.8 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.8 sec 256 KBytes 96.3 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.3 sec 512 KBytes 294 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.0 sec 512 KBytes 299 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-37.6 sec 512 KBytes 112 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.7 sec 512 KBytes 224 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.3 sec 384 KBytes 148 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.9 sec 640 KBytes 293 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-24.8 sec 512 KBytes 169 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-16.4 sec 384 KBytes 192 Kbits/sec >> >> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.4 sec 384 KBytes 147 Kbits/sec >> >> >> >> >> >> ho spento dnsmasq che non serviva a niente e andiamo di poco ma meglio >> >> >> >> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:16, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: >> >> >> > Il sintomo è abbastanza chiaro, ma dubito sia colpa della CPU o >> >> >> > meglio, >> >> >> > secondo me qualcosa >> >> >> > è stata scritta male, 100Kbps sono davvero ridicoli. A maggior >> >> >> > ragione >> >> >> > quando ste cpu hanno anche qualche set dedicato >> >> >> > alla crittografia simmetrica... >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:04, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ma il problema sembra proprio l'eccessivo utilizzo di cpu per la vpn >> >> >> >> perche' stando in ssh sulla picostation mentre c'e' traffico che >> >> >> >> passa >> >> >> >> sulla vpn diventa completamente unresponsive non sente nemmeno >> >> >> >> ctrl+c >> >> >> >> sulla shell... quando il traffico finisce mi esegue tutto quello che >> >> >> >> gli avevo mandato nel fratempo >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:01, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> >> <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> ha >> >> >> >> scritto: >> >> >> >> >>Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal PC)? >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > dovrei installarmi anche batman-adv sul pc... >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > Il 03 luglio 2011 12:58, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >> E' chiaro che non può essere il tuo upstream, >> >> >> >> >> ma sei certo che il collo di bottiglia non sia nella capacità di >> >> >> >> >> sta >> >> >> >> >> rete >> >> >> >> >> mesh tunnellata? >> >> >> >> >> Hai provato a lanciare 2 iperf in parallelo? >> >> >> >> >> Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal PC)? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:34, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> >> >> <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >> ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> la picostation a e la z sono la stessa picostation... dalla >> >> >> >> >>> picostation a posso decidere se accendere tinc e quindi far >> >> >> >> >>> passare >> >> >> >> >>> traffico mesh su internet oppure se usare solo i link wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> dal computer pocco decidere sia di usare la picostation come gw >> >> >> >> >>> sia >> >> >> >> >>> di >> >> >> >> >>> usare il router adsl >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> le casistiche quindi sono 3 >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> iperf via internet senza tinc >500KB/s >> >> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh senza tinc ~ 20Kb/s >> >> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh tunnellata su internet con tinc ~100Kb/s >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:27, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha >> >> >> >> >>> scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> > Fammi capire: >> >> >> >> >>> > - tra le tua pico(A) e quella(Z) con l'adsl ci sono diversi >> >> >> >> >>> > nodi >> >> >> >> >>> > e >> >> >> >> >>> > con >> >> >> >> >>> > iperf >> >> >> >> >>> > hai risultati di 20Kbps (A->Z) in L3 puro ? Mentre se usi >> >> >> >> >>> > tinc va >> >> >> >> >>> > a >> >> >> >> >>> > 100Kbps? >> >> >> >> >>> > - chi sono gli end-point tinc? >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:12, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> >> >>> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >>> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> senza tinc praticamente non c'e' connettivita' ( a volte va >> >> >> >> >>> >> ma >> >> >> >> >>> >> roba >> >> >> >> >>> >> tipo 20k perche' sono un sacco di op alcuni dei quali fanno >> >> >> >> >>> >> schifo...) >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> se invece faccio iperf passando per internet senza tinc >> >> >> >> >>> >> ottengo >> >> >> >> >>> >> risultati sempre sopra i 500KB/s >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:01, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha >> >> >> >> >>> >> scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> > Hai gia controllato i valori tra le 2 pico con e senza >> >> >> >> >>> >> > tinc? >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:45, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> >> >>> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >>> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> iperf -c su computer che usa una picostation come gateway >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> -> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Picostation con tinc <- adsl 8 megabit -> iperf --server >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> su >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> eigenlab.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 11:33, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > 100kbps mi pare davvero troppo poco anche per quelle >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > cessonanocpu. >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > Come li hai ottenuti sti valori? >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:10, Gioacchino Mazzurco >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > ha scritto: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Ciao a tutti! >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Facendo dei test mi sono accorto che le vpn con tinc >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> installato >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> sui >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> nodi ci vanno max a 100k anche se la banda dell'adsl e' >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> molta >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> di >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu'... ho cominciato a cercare ed ho letto che la >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> causa >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e' >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> probabilmente la CPU che non ce la fa a fare encryption >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> decryption >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu' velocemente di cosi' >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> leggendo il man di tinc ho trovato questo >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Cipher = cipher (blowfish) >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> The symmetric cipher algorithm used to >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encrypt >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> UDP >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packets. Any cipher supported by OpenSSL is >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> recognised. >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Fur†>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> thermore, specifying "none" will turn off >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packet >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption. It is best to use only those ciphers which >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> support >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> CBC mode. >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> mettendo none dovrebbe essere disabilitata l' >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption e >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> quindi >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> avere piu' banda, il meccanismo degli host con il file >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> con >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> la >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> chiave >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> pubblica continua a funzionare disabilitando la >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cifratura, >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> soprattutto bastera' aggiungere quell'opzione li oppure >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> bisogna >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cambiare altre conf? >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> > Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >>> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >>> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> >> > Wireless mailing list >> >> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Wireless mailing list >> >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Wireless mailing list >> >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > >> > -- >> > Antonio Quartulli >> > >> > ..each of us alone is worth nothing.. >> > Ernesto "Che" Guevara >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wireless mailing list >> > Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@ml.ninux.org >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > -- > Antonio Quartulli > > ..each of us alone is worth nothing.. > Ernesto "Che" Guevara > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@ml.ninux.org > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@ml.ninux.org http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
