Hello meshies
I know everybody is having fun at Battle Mesh, but if someone could take a
look at this I' d really appreciate.
I really have my eyes on the C50, as it seems to be the cheapest dual-band
on the market now. I can get on in Brazil for less than 40 USD! Last week I
bought one which I later found out to be an unsupported V2. But now I got a
V1, and it almost works. If it works, I'll the buy about 10 for an
installation in two weeks.
The problem seems to be with 802.11. The 2.4Ghz radio does not work in
ad-hoc mode - although the 5Ghz radio does. Then I don't know if it's
related, but when it meshes with a WDR3500, the Internet is painfully
slow, with some ping times about 1000-2000 milliseconds. Pinging from the
LiMe gateway at the same time gives me a steady 57ms. Perhaps a different
driver should be used?
Attached is a file with information gathered from the router.
A few other oddities (not as important as the issue above):
- Could not flash from stock directly with the compiled LiMe. I had to
first use this openwrt [1], then LiMe
- When I flash from the firmware above with the LiMe I compiled or the
download Lede, I get the message:
" It appears that you try to flash an image that does not fit into the
flash memory, please verify the image file!
Size: 7.63 MB (7.62 MB available)"
It works fine, tough.
- The firmware I cooked with my community settings (using cooker) won't go
through to the Internet, and gives this ESSID instead of my
community's:{{NETWORK_NAME}} (although it meshes with the LiMe gateway)
- The firmware I cooked without community settings connects to the Internet
through the LiMe gateway with the sluggish times above.
Thanks!
[1]
http://dl.eko.one.pl/luci/chaos_calmer/ramips/luci-15.05-ramips-mt7620-Arch…
--
bruno(a)pobox.com ▀─█▄██▄▀▄
http://brunovianna.net ─█▄██▄▀█▀█▄
skype: randomico▀─█▄██▄▀█▀█▄▌██─█▌█▌
Hey sisters,
Let me share some good news for community networks -and bad ones for ISPs:
0.- Bitmessage has been working on LAN peer auto-discovery. It is
already in v0.6 branch, we tested it and it works.
1.- Retroshare will finally have asynchronous messaging working
(Retroshare already has LAN peer auto-discovery).
2.- Impressive ZeroNet is aware of the importance of LAN peer
auto-discovery and they are going to add this feature.
Hi,
Sometimes I explain what this community network thing is to someone in
my district. They likes the idea and they has an ISP router. Then I ask
them if they would like to share their Internet connection and they says
"yes, why not?". But then they asks if users in the community network
could have access to their private home network. I answer they could,
but it can be avoided in different ways -create different VLANs in the
ISP router, configure a firewall, closing ports in the computers...
Then they stops liking this community network thing.
It is frustrating, because many people do not share their Internet
connection because of this, and so we lose the resources we need.
I was wondering if there would be a way that LiMe could come
preconfigured in such a way that, when an Internet gateway is added, it
could only communicate to that ISP router, and no other host in that
private network. I mean to automatically create the proper firewall
rules so that the LiMe network could not access hosts in private networks.
That would not be real security, as that configuration could be removed
by any administrator in the community network, but we would be able to
start our answer saying "by default LiMe cannot enter into your private
network", and then explain what they could do to improve their security.
What do you think of it?
Have you found this obstacle?
What would you reply to that person?
Is my proposal doable?
If so, should I open a Github issue? Where? In lime-packages?
Hi all!
Sorry for pointing out an annoying fact, but our IRC channel is not
working as user support contact.
In my opinion should be removed from our contact page on the website.
Most of the questions being asked there remain unanswered because either
we're not answering fast enough or the users disconnect without waiting
enough for an answer (many users are not used to IRC).
This has never really worked.
It's neither being used for discussions about development as devs are
not often active there.
We can just remove the suggestion to contact us via IRC (as seems it's
not a valid contact anymore) and recommend just the mailing list.
Otherwise we can move the channel to another chat system.
What do you think?
Do we need to have a more effective chat for user support or just using
this mailing list is enough?
Bye,
Ilario
Next Wednesday Axel presents his PhD about BMX7 and the security
extensions of the routing protocol.
For those who do not know, BMX is one of the main protocols in
LibreMesh. Until now we are using BMX6, but BMX7 has many improvements
that I hope soon will be available in LibreMesh.
Title: Cooperation in Open, Decentralized, and Heterogeneous Computer
Networks
Author: AXEL FRANZ NEUMANN
Director: Dr. LEANDRO NAVARRO MOLDES
Co-director: Dr. LLORENÇ CERDÀ ALABERN
Date: Wednesday, December 20th, 2017
Time: 11:30 AM
Room: E106 - C6 Building - North Campus UPC (Barcelona)
Congratulations!
In Caimito we want to reduce our use of Internet bandwidth, at least for a few weeks until we can get a higher bandwidth connection.
Two ideas:
1) block certain URLs, such as YouTube,
2) throttle traffic.
Maybe only during peak traffic hours.
Looking for software to install on our gateway router we've found Tiny Proxy. Do you think it might work, and/or suggest something else?
https://tinyproxy.github.io/
Our gateway router is a TP-Link WDR3500 running LibreMesh from February of this year (maybe 2016.11, I'll check). We can update to the latest release of LibreMesh if that makes a difference (we plan to update sometime in the next few months).
Happy end of the Gregorian year,
Pato
Does anyone have LiMe working on a Raspberry Pi 3? I can boot up the
latest RPI-3 image and get the eth0 port connected to my WAN uplink, but
the mesh doesn't work and the AP is not broadcasting any SSIDs. The
SSIDs all show "//Wireless is disabled or not associated" //and the
wlan0-mesh_13 interface shows DOWN on the BMX6 Status page.
I get two errors during init:
[ 10.862080] brcmfmac: brcmf_cfg80211_add_iface: iface validation
failed: err=-16
[ 12.117179] brcmfmac: brcmf_cfg80211_get_channel: chanspec failed (-1)
The brcmf_cfg80211_add_iface error traces back to this code in
cfg80211_change_iface() in net/wireless/util.c:
> /* if it's part of a bridge, reject changing type to
> station/ibss */
> if ((dev->priv_flags & IFF_BRIDGE_PORT) &&
> (ntype == NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC ||
> ntype == NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION ||
> ntype == NL80211_IFTYPE_P2P_CLIENT))
> return -EBUSY;
which seems to imply that this can't work (bridging an AdHoc
interface). Or maybe the AdHoc mode has to be set before the bridge is
added?
Any suggestions or pointers would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Bob
Hi all,
a new version of Chef [1] allow snapshot builds of LibreMesh to quickly
test it on new devices and the packages from develop branch [2].
To use the (unstable) snapshot builds please select "Advanced" in chef
and set the release to "snapshot".
I'd be happiest about your feedback!
Best,
Paul
[1] https://chef.libremesh.org/
[2] https://github.com/libremesh/lime-packages/tree/develop
buonasera a tutti, sto cercando di allestire una rete mesh amatoriale
gratuita nel mio paese , prendo esempio da voi e dalla vostra voglia di
fare.
Ho un unico problema, ho installato con successo su due minirouter
(airgateway della ubiquity e un iglnet gl-ar150), il
software libremesh i collegamenti radio funzionano benissimo e i gateway
smistano correttamente il traffico, ma se uso speedtest.net via web o
iperf via ssh vedo che le velocità superano raramente i 10 Mbits vi
chiedo se cio è normale.
saluti
Hi all,
I have nodes A, B, C and all are mesh.
Node A is the exit node - connected via ethernet cable on eth0 and
node B and node C are connected A via mesh.
So, when I connected node C via ethernet, does it start using ethernet
as backhaul or still keeping mesh.
that is, when a client connects via wifi to node C, does the traffic
go via option 1 or option 2?
option 1:
client wifi <--> node C <--> mesh iface <--> node A <--> router
option 2:
client wifi <--> node C <--> ethernet eth0 <--> router
Thanks
