On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 10:26:29 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote: > ho provato ma viene un listone enorme di warning unknown packet type
azz :/ quei warning rompono parecchio...visto che ora l'interesse e` capire se escono pacchetti frammentati o no, un semplice | grep -v warning potrebbe aiutare? almeno per capire.. > > Il 03 luglio 2011 22:24, Antonio Quartulli <or...@autistici.org> ha scritto: > > On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 10:20:13 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote: > >> > come vedi che batman frammenta? se usi batctl td dovresti vedere i > >> me ne accorgo perche' schizza la cpu > >> > >> che parametro devo passare a td per farmi dire la dimensione dei pacchetti? > > > > questo non credo tu possa farlo. Cioe` le informazioni sono quelle che > > vedi, non ha opzioni per dirti roba in piu`, a quel punto ti conviene > > usare tcpdump vero :P > > > > Pero` tramite -p puoi dirgli di visualizzare solo i pacchetti unicast > > frammentati. A quel punto vedi se vengon fuori pacchetti frammentati o > > no > > > >> 1280 l'ho settato a mano sulle interfacce sui computer con iperf > >> > >> Il 03 luglio 2011 19:47, Antonio Quartulli <or...@autistici.org> ha > >> scritto: > >> > On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 07:41:24 +0200, ZioPRoTo (Saverio Proto) wrote: > >> >> OK sembra un problema specifico di batman... non so aiutarti. > >> >> > >> >> Saverio > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 16:43, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> ha > >> >> scritto: > >> >> > nonostante l' mtu sia settato a 1280 ( quello dei pc con iperf ) la > >> >> > cpu della pico schizzava uguale, ho disabilitato la frammentazione su > >> >> > batman-adv la banda ora resta piu' o meno uguale ma la cpu non schizza > >> >> > piu'... > >> >> > > >> >> > perche' batman frammenta anche se non dovrebbe essere necessario? ( > >> >> > wireshark dice che i pacchetti che escono dalla mia macchina sono > >> >> > ~700byte e l'mtu e' settato a 1280) > >> > > >> > come vedi che batman frammenta? se usi batctl td dovresti vedere i > >> > singoli pacchetti (e puoi appurare se sono frammentati o meno). > >> > E poi dove leggi l'MTU a 1280? > >> > > >> > Comunque hai detto che usi ipv6 con pmtu discovery giusto? quindi i > >> > pacchetti verrano creati della dimensione esatta per non essere > >> > frammentati > >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > l' interfaccia tunnel che ha nome nnx-adv ha l'mtu settato a 1400 > >> >> > mentre quello del bridge che contiene bat0 e' 1350 > >> >> > > >> >> > bat0 invece riporta 1373 nonostante quello del bridge sia 1350... ( > >> >> > questo credo sia causato dal fatto che ho disabilitato la > >> >> > fragmentation su batman-adv ) > >> >> > > >> >> > root@OpenWrt:~# brctl show > >> >> > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces > >> >> > br-clients 8000.7aa872dfafbe no bat0 > >> >> > > >> >> > root@OpenWrt:~# ip a s > >> >> > 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN > >> >> > link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00 > >> >> > inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo > >> >> > inet6 ::1/128 scope host > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast > >> >> > state UP qlen 1000 > >> >> > link/ether 00:15:6d:7b:96:7a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > >> >> > inet 192.168.1.21/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth0 > >> >> > inet6 fe80::215:6dff:fe7b:967a/64 scope link > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > 4: wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1524 qdisc mq state > >> >> > UNKNOWN qlen 1000 > >> >> > link/ether 00:15:6d:7a:96:7a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > >> >> > inet 192.168.1.21/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global wlan0 > >> >> > inet6 2001:470:ca42:ee:ab:15:6d7a:967a/64 scope global > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > inet6 fe80::215:6dff:fe7a:967a/64 scope link > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > 5: bat0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1373 qdisc pfifo_fast > >> >> > state UNKNOWN qlen 1000 > >> >> > link/ether 7a:a8:72:df:af:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > >> >> > 7: br-clients: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1350 qdisc > >> >> > noqueue state UNKNOWN > >> >> > link/ether 7a:a8:72:df:af:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > >> >> > inet 192.168.167.21/24 brd 192.168.167.255 scope global br-clients > >> >> > inet6 2001:470:ca42:ee:ab:15:6d7b:967a/64 scope global > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > inet6 fe80::78a8:72ff:fedf:afbe/64 scope link > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > 8: nnx-adv: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1400 qdisc > >> >> > pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 500 > >> >> > link/ether a2:19:0b:84:4f:5e brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > >> >> > inet6 fe80::a019:bff:fe84:4f5e/64 scope link > >> >> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> >> > > >> >> > Il 03 luglio 2011 16:12, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >> >> > ha scritto: > >> >> >> e' strano.. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> perche' io sto usando ipv6 per fare i test quindi il path mtu > >> >> >> discovery dovrebbe funzionare e in effetti riducendo l'mtu a 1280 e > >> >> >> disabilitando cipher ottengo un misero raddoppio della banda quando > >> >> >> va > >> >> >> bene... > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 14:37, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: > >> >> >>> Quello che va meglio :) > >> >> >>> Ce ne saranno una dozzina nel kernel, aggiungili. > >> >> >>> Così, a naso, vista la natura particolare del canale, un algo > >> >> >>> abbastanza > >> >> >>> tollerante alle perdite/timeout. > >> >> >>> Ma questo solo per capire sa cambia qualcosa o siamo sempre con gli > >> >> >>> stessi > >> >> >>> valori.. > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 14:23, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >> >> >>> <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >> >> >>> ha scritto: > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> non so quale usa di default tu quale mi consigli di usare? > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> Il 03 luglio 2011 14:18, Darkman <dark...@darkman.it> ha scritto: > >> >> >>>> > Bene, ora puoi ripetere le prove cambiando l'algoritmo di > >> >> >>>> > controllo di > >> >> >>>> > congestione sul client iperf. > >> >> >>>> > Cosa stai usando ora? Reno? > >> >> >>>> > > >> >> >>>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 14:09, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >> >> >>>> > <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> > >> >> >>>> > ha scritto: > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> altri test fissando la quantita' > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-62.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 270 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-55.3 sec 2.00 MBytes 304 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-64.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 261 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-58.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 285 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-99.6 sec 2.00 MBytes 169 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-96.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 174 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-89.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 187 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-66.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 253 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-99.9 sec 2.00 MBytes 161 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-88.1 sec 2.00 MBytes 190 Kbits/sec > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:57, Gioacchino Mazzurco > >> >> >>>> >> <gmazzurc...@gmail.com> ha > >> >> >>>> >> scritto: > >> >> >>>> >> > senza tinc la configurazione rimane uguale ma il traffico al > >> >> >>>> >> > posto di > >> >> >>>> >> > passare dal tunnel via internet passa solo attraverso i link > >> >> >>>> >> > wireless > >> >> >>>> >> > > >> >> >>>> >> > 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 > >> >> >>>> >> > >> >> >>>> > > >> >> >>>> > > >> >> >>>> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> >>>> > 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 > >> > > > > > -- > > Antonio Quartulli > > > > ..each of us alone is worth nothing.. > > Ernesto "Che" Guevara > > -- 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