[MLB-WIRELESS] OSPF BGP

[Nigel]

Dan, and others,

Thank you for the nice comments on my router webpage. It appears
that a lot of people don't really know how to set up OSPF or BGP (me
being one of them!).

I think it would be a good idea to give a presentation on routing for
the Melbourne wireless network, bearing in mind that a lot of us are
not computer, network or linux gurus. It would be nice to go over
the basics as well as some of the Melbourne wireless requirements,
like dead intervals and costs.

Do we have any volunteers?????

Nigel
node GWS


------------



Ryan, what would you suggest for GHO? Are three 2.4GHz interfaces -
each on
a different channel serving a different area - not an improvement
over a
single interface? A 5.8GHz interface is also planned. At the moment
the
idea is to allow people to connect from wherever they can to do signal
strength and data rate testing. We should also start experimenting
with
network Quality-of-Service (QoS) applications and be measuring their
usefulness.

FYI, as of this writing:

GHO-North has two OSPF clients:
10.10.129.3 Node GWS - nice webpage and propagating 13 /28 subnets!
- also propagating 127.0.0.1. Naughty!
10.10.129.4 Node IKD - no webpage and is propagating 192.168.20.0/24
- and 192.168.60.0/24 onto the network. Naughty!
- nice work on the long link though. :)

GHO-South also has two OSPF clients:
10.10.130.178 Node GES - propagating 4 /28 subnet, a /30 and a nice
webpage
10.10.130.180 Node FKR - propagating 3 /28 subnets. (no webpage on the
router)

GHO-Mobile has one OSPF client:
10.10.131.70 - Node FUT - propagating 3 /28 subnets and a nice webpage

Running ARP on the GHO router reveals no other clients connected at
all.

Of course, too many clients on any one AP will cause it to slow right
down
with hidden-node problems - negating GHO's usefulness. So I believe
the
longer-term plan is to work out who are the best candidate nodes to
retain a
permanent direct-link to GHO. Once chosen, only they will be allowed
access. I would hope that the method used to choose these nodes is
fair and
open, and provides the best technical outcome for the overall network.
Perhaps some generally-agreed-upon official guidelines should be
drawn up so
that everyone is clear on what is required to become a permanent
client of
Node GHO. If we don't I can see GHO becoming a source of discontent
and
dissatisfaction once again.

At this point I'd say that the most likely nodes to be allowed to
retain a
GHO connection are those who serve traffic to a cluster of Melbourne
Wireless nodes. GHO is too important to allow permanent leaf-node
access,
except maybe on the "GHO-Mobile" interface, or to providers of
important
content to the network.

The point is important enough to be made again:
For technical reasons, GHO cannot offer open-slather access if it is
to be
truly useful to the Melbourne Wireless network. Just because you
*can*
connect to it doesn't necessarily mean you *should* connect to it.
If you
can connect to a more local node, please do so. If you can set up a
multi-radio routing node in your area, even better!

Cheers,

Dan

To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message