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▀─█▄██▄▀█▀█▄▌██─█▌█▌
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: [Battlemesh] GSoC 2019 announced (Battlemesh Digest, Vol 104,
Issue 7)
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:16:35 +0100
From: Andreas Br?u <ab(a)andi95.de>
Reply-To: battlemesh(a)ml.ninux.org
To: Battle of the Mesh Mailing List <battlemesh(a)ml.ninux.org>
Hi there,
on Tuesday Google announce GSoC 2019. Org applications will start on
January 15 2019. Until then we have time to update the projects page at
https://projects.freifunk.net/#/projects
Please add new ideas to the page, update the existing or delete the
obsolete ones. Changes to the projects can be made at
https://github.com/freifunk/projects.freifunk.net-contents
You can find the timeline at
https://developers.google.com/open-source/gsoc/timeline
If you have any questions, please get in touch with me or write an email
to gsoc-org-admins(a)freifunk.net
Best regards,
Andi
We have a TPLink router that belongs to the ISP and we cannot out LibreMesh on it not edit it's configuration. We have a TPLink 842 with LibreMesh, and we want it to connect to the WiFi of the ISP's router as its internet connection. How can we do this? I imagine we configure it on the Interfaces page and also the Wireless page, something about client mode and bridging interfaces, but my first attempt didn't work so I'm asking instead of failing a thousand times alone.
Great! I will try this when I have a chance. Thank you!
El 29 de noviembre de 2018 17:11:31 GMT-05:00, modante(a)disroot.org escribió:
>First, connect to your own tplink libremesh router via ethernet.
>Then do a scan of the air: Network > Wireless > Scan.
>The SSID of the Companys router should appear with more than 50% of
>signal. If less, is a bad idea, better to change the default antennas
>of both routers for 2 directional ones or change the location of
>routers in order to have a good line of sight between them.
>When the SSID is listed in the scan, just connect to it (Join network)
>and a new page will appear asking the "Name of the new network": WWAN
>(the default one is ok), and the password of the AP. Remember to unmark
>the option "Replace wireless configuration". Firewall zone: WAN (the
>default one)
>Click on Save & Apply and a new connection in Client Mode will appear.
>Now if you are connected via ethernet, you will have internet
>connectivity.
>Also remember that when the connectivity with the companys router
>drops, all the rest of the APs shared with the same radio will
>dissapear.
>Is a good idea to do this kind of connection between routers using dual
>band routers and doing the link in the 5 Ghz band to leave the AP at
>2,4 free of interferences and resources.
>Sorry if there are mistakes in the explanation. I am not developer,
>only user.
>Good luck :-)
>29 de noviembre de 2018 18:09, "Patricio Gibbs"
><patricio(a)altermundi.net
>(mailto:%22Patricio%20Gibbs%22%20<patricio(a)altermundi.net>)> escribió:
> I appreciate the info...
>
>El 29 de noviembre de 2018 11:27:33 GMT-05:00, modante(a)disroot.org
>(mailto:modante@disroot.org) escribió:
>>If I understand right, you want to use the company's TPLink router to
>>be used like gateway to access internet, Doesn't it?
>
>Yes.
>
>>Then the best way I think is to connect this router to your own
>>libremesh TPLink router via ethernet RJ-45 from a LAN port to the WAN
>>port of the libremesh router.
>
>Connecting via Ethernet is not possible because there is a road in
>between the routers and we do not have money to buy a cable and install
>it in a way that it wouldn't get damaged.
>
>>I you wanted to connect them via Wireless, you have to scan from the
>>libremesh router and connect to the company's router wireless station
>>that will create a new Interface called WWAN that will act like the
>>main gateway in the libremesh network.
>
>This sounds like exactly what we want to do, but we need more detailed
>instructions. In what part of the LibreMesh interface do we find
>buttons to create a WWAN interface, scan available WiFi networks, and
>connect the chosen network to the WWAN interface?
>
>>When you do this, you have to be sure that the libremesh router IP is
>>not in the same sub-network that the IP from the company router.
>>Probably this is not a problem because usually the company routers are
>>in the 192.168.0.x or 192.168.1.x subnets while libremesh routers are
>>configured in the 13.x.x.x subnet. But can be cause of trouble when
>>using openwrt because sometimes both routers are in the same subnet by
>>default.
>
>I agree that this will not be a problem in this case since LibreMesh
>creates a 10.13.x.x network and the ISP router is 192.168.0.x.
>
>>Please, try this and tell us if it works.
>
>I look forward to trying with more detailed instructions.
>
>:-)
>
>>Regards :-)
>>29 de noviembre de 2018 1:31, "Patricio Gibbs via lime-users"
>><lime-users(a)lists.libremesh.org
>(mailto:lime-users@lists.libremesh.org)
>>(mailto:%22Patricio%20Gibbs%20via%20lime-users%22%20<lime-users(a)lists.libremesh.org
>(mailto:lime-users@lists.libremesh.org)>)>
>>escribió:
>> We have a TPLink router that belongs to the ISP and we cannot out
>>LibreMesh on it not edit it's configuration. We have a TPLink 842 with
>>LibreMesh, and we want it to connect to the WiFi of the ISP's router
>as
>>its internet connection. How can we do this? I imagine we configure it
>>on the Interfaces page and also the Wireless page, something about
>>client mode and bridging interfaces, but my first attempt didn't work
>>so I'm asking instead of failing a thousand times alone.
In a new network, the backhaul link will be two PowerBeam M5-400, with the one in the community on a water tank. During the first few weeks, while we wait for more antennas, there are a pair of LiteBeams we want to use, one on the water tank, the other at a house. We do not plan to try putting LibreMesh on these devices because they have new firmware that is difficult to replace. At the water tank, I want to know what of these three options will work for the PowerBeam to connect to the LiteBeam:
1) cable from the LAN port on the PoE of one device to the LAN port on the PoE of the other device
2) switch
3) router (I know this will work)
Hello,
I am creating a profile for the project NuestraRED.org in Colombia:
https://github.com/kleper/network-profiles/tree/master/NuestraRed.org
In the configuration option of ipv4 I am using:
option main_ipv4_address '10.% N1.0.0 / 16 '
I would like each of the nodes to have ip 10.x.x.1 / 16 is it possible? I
did a test with the configuration:
option main_ipv4_address '10.% N1.0.1 / 16 '
But compiling and installing the firmware does not start the interface with
the defined ipv4.
Although really what I would like to do is the following:
That all the nodes remain in a network / 24 and that each node tries the ip
10.x.x.1 / 24 to have a better form of control, looking at the
documentation I think it can be something like:
option main_ipv4_address '10.% N1.% M5.1 / 16/24 '
Do you think it can work like that?
Thank you.
a) I'm new here, be gentle
b) Anyone got libremesh running on the UAP-AC-M or Mesh Pro units?
What is most interesting is that they are dual radio, passive poe
powered, and outdoor ready. The M has 1 ethernet, the Mesh Pro has
dual with PoE passthrough. I'm not seeing it listed in the image or
the builder, hoping someone has done the basics here.
c) Anyone have some examples of an in-production mesh with 2.4 + 5Ghz radios?
my design concept is that libremesh would be the backbone network
using both radios for mesh. It would offer outdoor hotspot style WiFi
off the 2.4Ghz, and the wired interface would run down into the
customer's home and be their connection through a PoE injector.
I'm hoping that even over 3-4 mesh hops I could deliver a reliable
5Mbps service with the UAP-AC-M.
If a customer wanted to upgrade to a faster plan I would swap the
UAP-AC-M with a UAP-AC-Mesh Pro and add a PtP from a tower (I'm a
wISP) plugged into the Mesh Pro's second ethernet port and I would
bridge that to a VLAN on the PtP radio to essentially trunk the mesh
back to the tower.
That customer would remain on the mesh, would benefit from the direct
link to the tower, and would enable shorter hops for the basic plan
users.
This kind of hinges on the low-cost $99 UAP-AC-M as a basic CPE as I
can't find any other devices on the market that offer a complete
product ready to use.
Top down design would be small pockets of mesh in the incredibly
difficult areas to cover with traditional point to multipoint
microwave models to supplement that design. Would likely run an
edgerouter x at each tower as a place to terminate the VLANs in a
libremesh compatible device.
