Hi Ilario
Thank you so much for taking the time.
So within the same network the DHCP assignments are unique independently of what node the client is connected to, correct? If you move between different networks, you’re saying a conflict could of course arise. Is this package available in standard openwrt? If so could it be used in a non-lime network where [long story short] there are a bunch of routers/APs [with mesh nodes on the wan side] all with the same IP and subnet and DHCP range being offered to clients [similarly to lime nodes all having 10.13.0.1 etc…], in order to have a distributed map of active leases and prevent other routers/APs from assigning that lease to one of their clients, or is this plugin relying on the layer 2 routing in lime?
Since you’ve been so nice to explain this, could I ask you for a followup [if you have time] about an old thread I opened called "Speed/latency issues” from the 13th of february? I can’t understand why lime has been performing so well for me [60mbps speedtest.net over 2.4GHz between two TL WR1043NDs meshing with each other] only once - literally, and terribly after that [3 to 15 mbps, 80ms latency (instead of 2ms with olsr), etc…]. More details on the original post. Only if you have a few minutes, thank you so much.
Nk
On 13 apr 2017, 12:08 +0200, Ilario Gelmetti <iochesonome@gmail.com>, wrote:
On 04/13/2017 12:12 AM, Nk via lime-users wrote:
I’m wondering though, since every node, at least in our network, has the
10.13.0.1 IP on the lan side, how are conflicts avoided or solved when a
device with IP 10.13.0.108 - for example - roams to a WLAN of a node
where a device with such IP is already present? Or are IP leases
monitored network-wide to avoid two devices having the same IP at the
same time anywhere on the network?
I hope I got your point...
There's a package in lime-packages named "dnsmasq-lease-share" [1] and
included in normal LiMe images, this shares a file with the leases using
Alfred (a Batman adv utility). Have a look at these files [2].
So the leases list is shared among the whole Batman adv cloud.
If you move from a Batman cloud to another (which is less usual) the
collisions are avoided (well, reduced enough) by the %N1 parameter in
10.%N1.0.0/16 [3].
Moreover there should be some kind of check of IP availability any time
an IP is assigned, don't know really.
And if so, how big a pool do you need
to always accomodate such vast numbers of clients?
Mmh?
As there's this lease share mechanism, you don't need a pool much bigger
than the number of your clients.
In absence of such mechanism, you could calculate the probability of a
collision as in "birthday paradox" [4].
Bye!
Ilario
[1]
https://github.com/libremesh/lime-packages/tree/develop/packages/dnsmasq-lease-share
[2]
https://github.com/libremesh/lime-packages/blob/develop/packages/dnsmasq-lease-share/src/dnsmasq-lease-share.lua#L28
[3]
https://github.com/libremesh/lime-packages/blob/develop/packages/lime-system/files/etc/config/lime-example#L26
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthday_problem
_______________________________________________
lime-users mailing list
lime-users@lists.libremesh.org
https://lists.libremesh.org/mailman/listinfo/lime-users