Hello,
LEDE supports auto choosing the least used wifi channel. According to
the lime-defaults [1] Libremesh defaults to channel 11 for 2.4GHz and 48
for 5GHz. Is a setting for "auto" possible in the "config lime wifi"
section and if so, wouldn't that be a better default value?
If not, wouldn't that be a very useful feature to avoid channel
overloads when people flash the same image on dozens of routers?
Best,
Paul
[1]:
https://github.com/libremesh/lime-packages/blob/develop/packages/lime-syste…
Hi, I'm trying to find a generic way to find the currently installed
release.
On standard LEDE I'm using `ubus call system board` and check the
`release` section. On Libremesh a look at /etc/lime_release provides the
information. Is it possible to modify the ubus output to give the same
information as lime_release does?
The most simple solution could be to modify the /etc/openwrt_release file.
Thanks in advance!
Best,
Paul
HI!
for the Ninux community I translated the page quickstartguide.
https://github.com/libremesh/lime-web/pull/28
I had the switch between the languages only in that page.
And in jekyll I did't found as change automatically the set lang in html
tag.. but works.. :)
see you soon
Ignifugo
Hi guys,
We are here with George from Sarantaporo testing this UniFi AC Mesh
devices.
We successfuly flashed two of them that are meshing with each other and
with other devices through 2.4ghz and 5ghz with AC.
The problem is that the throughput is not very good.
Doing a netperf, we get (on the AC link):
root@LiMe-3c5540:~# netperf -H fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3e:5435%wlan0-mesh
netperf -cCD1 -t tcp_maerts -l30MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from ::0 (::)
port 0 AF_INET6 to fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3e:5435%wlan0-mesh () port 0
AF_INET6 : demoRecv Send Send Socket
Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time
Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec
87380 16384 16384 10.06 55.41
and on the 802.11g link:
root@LiMe-3c5540:~# netperf -H fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3d:5435%wlan1-mesh
netperf -cCD1 -t tcp_maerts -l30
MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from ::0 (::) port 0 AF_INET6 to
fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3d:5435%wlan1-mesh () port 0 AF_INET6 : demo
Recv Send Send
Socket Socket Message Elapsed
Size Size Size Time Throughput
bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec
87380 16384 16384 11.88 1.19
So... pretty crappy, isn't it? (the devices are 30cm away from each
other, and no wireless traffic is around but those.
Also, another thing called my atention.
These are the luci wireless outputs for both of the devices.
Isn't it strange that both of them have high reception speed and super
slow transmission speed with each other?
We have already tried changing the channels.
Also tried to avoid 11s/adhoc and connect as client/master.
The outcome is the same:
root@LiMe-3c5540:~# netperf -H fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3c:5435%wlan0-1
netperf -cCD1 -t tcp_maerts -l30MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from ::0 (::)
port 0 AF_INET6 to fe80::f29f:c2ff:fe3c:5435%wlan0-1 () port 0 AF_INET6
: demoRecv Send Send Socket
Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time
Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec
87380 16384 16384 10.01 62.59
I haven't tried all this configs yet: https://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/uci/
wireless#ac_capabilities
But maybe there is some knowlege in the group that can help on this.
What do you think about this?
Regards,
Hi guys,
George from Sarantoporo and I are trying to give support to a new
device (yes, couldn't we start from something easier, right?).
Could you give us some guidance on supporting a new device that
apparently has only changed the Storage structure from the previous
version.
Unsupported new version: Xiaomi Mi Router 3:
https://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/xiaomi/mir3#mtd_output_from_stock_firmware
Supported old version: Xiaomi Mi Router Mini:
https://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/xiaomi/mini#mtd_partitioning
We have already collected all the relevant information in the Wiki
What users in the forum were saying is that the 'only thing' that needs
to change is the MTD definition, but I don't know how to do it. Any
guidance? I have the devices in front of me and I'm open to brick them
(they have a recovery partition method embedded so it is not a problem
apparently)
The problem is that there is no developer with one of them at hand...
and I have it in front of me ... so why don't we try and have it
supported? It is a very neat device (28 euros for a dual band, ufl-
attached 3 antenna router with 128 storage, 64 ram, usb...)
Any suggestion?
Regards,
Hi all,
currently images with different flavors look the same.
---/lime_mini/lede-17.01.2-libremesh-ar71xx-generic-tl-wdr3600-v1-squashfs-factory.bin
/lime_default/lede-17.01.2-libremesh-ar71xx-generic-tl-wdr3600-v1-squashfs-factory.bin
Would it be possible to use the EXTRA_IMAGE_NAME (already used to add
"libremesh") to add the flavor as well?
lede-17.01.2-libremesh-lime_default-ar71xx-generic-tl-wdr3600-v1-squashfs-factory.bin
I think it wouldn't cause any split("-") troubles in scripts as the -v1-
is already individual per profile.
Best,
Paul
Hi Libremesh Dev Team,
I am Senthilkumar from India. This year Battlemesh V10 event. I heard about
the Libremesh firmware and how it makes easy to create a mesh network on
single flash.
I really like the implementation and want to flash the Libremesh firmware
in my existing community wireless nodes.
I am using GL-INET AR150 routers for all my existing nodes. But I couldn't
able to find the correct firmware for the
https://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/gl-inet/gl-ar150 router.
Can you please help me on finding the right firmware for this router.
Looking forward to hear from you.
--
Thanks and Regards,
* • **Senthilkumar M*
* • **Community Manager,*
* • **Google Developer Group Madurai**,*
*• **Mentor, Metoomentor.org*
* • **Senior Research Engineer, Qualcomm. *
* • allaboutsenthil.in <http://allaboutsenthil.in>*
• +91 8095207092
I tested the proposed approach and below patch again after updating my
machine to ubuntu 16.04 with 4.8.0 kernel and there ip4-in-ip6 and
ip6-in-6ip all just works out of the box. No need to configure ip6tnl0
tunnel in any mode. It seems enough that bmx6 already configures the
bmxdefault tunnel device in any/ipv6 mode with a :: remote address.
First packet of an icmp request sequence at the receiving side always
pops out of the bmxdefault tunnel. Then, its reply triggers the creation
of a dedicated bidirectional tunnel also at the receiving side which is
used for following request and reply icmp packets. No fake ipv6 tunnel
addresses are used anymore!
To ensure backwards compatibility it should be checked how kernels in
already deployed openwrt and Lede based lime version behave.
cu
/axel
On 14.06.2017 07:30, Henning Rogge wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Axel Neumann <neumann(a)cgws.de> wrote:
>> I put a patch for bmx6 in this branch
>> https://github.com/axn/bmx6/commits/master.NonFakeTunAddresses
>> https://github.com/axn/bmx6/commit/5dc6678cf9c2887ca5e32c8d7527c5f660ddb7e9
>>
>> But due to the current kernel behavior it does not acceppt ip4-in-ipv6
>> tunnelled packets if the remote tunnel address is not explicitly
>> specified and matching with the incoming tunnel packet. For ip6-in-ip6
>> it works.
>>
>> The problem is addressed by below linked patches. But none of them seems
>> to have been applied to current kernels. If somebody known or finds out
>> an alternative solution would be great.
>>
>> /axel
>>
>> http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2014/10/29/20
>> http://archive.linuxvirtualserver.org/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=lvs-devel&i=53D75B…
>
> Maybe we should ask about these patches again on netdev?
>
> Current behavior is a bit inconsistent and stupid.
>
> Henning
>
