headers
Michael Adams | 28 Apr 2011 06:07
Favicon

Suggestion: use Open-Mesh/BATMAN to help with layer 2/3 routing?

 
Idea #1: is BATMAN worth considering using as part of the layer 2 routing in Tinc?
Idea #2: would it be possible to embed BATMAN as an option to avoid having to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets?
 
<div>
<div>
	<a href="http://www.open-mesh.org/">http://www.open-mesh.org/</a>
</div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
<div>
	Idea #1: is BATMAN worth considering using as part of the layer 2 routing 
in Tinc?</div>
<div>
	Idea #2: would it be possible to embed BATMAN as an option to avoid having 
to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets?</div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
</div>
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Guus Sliepen | 28 Apr 2011 14:47
Gravatar

Re: Suggestion: use Open-Mesh/BATMAN to help with layer 2/3 routing?

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:07:01AM -0400, Michael Adams wrote:

> http://www.open-mesh.org/
> 
> Idea #1: is BATMAN worth considering using as part of the layer 2 routing in 
> Tinc?

I do not know if it would improve anything. Also, a VPN is an overlay network,
so it works on top of an already existing network, where you can more or less
assume all nodes can already talk to each other (barring NAT and firewalls of
course). Tinc's internal routing protocol, which is similar to OSPF, is used
only as a fallback for when packets cannot be sent directly to the destination.
This is not something other routing protocols take into account AFAIK (mostly
because they are not designed for overlay networks).

An idea I have is to expose the connections to various other nodes as VLANs on
the tap interface, or creating multiple tap interfaces, so you can run any
routing daemon on top of them, without having to hack an existing routing
protocol into tinc.

> Idea #2: would it be possible to embed BATMAN as an option to avoid having 
> to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets?

Why do you need to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets in the first place? And if
you already run a routing daemon on top of tinc, I do not see why you cannot
use BATMAN on it as well without having to embed it?

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
     Guus Sliepen <guus@...>

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:07:01AM -0400, Michael Adams wrote:

> http://www.open-mesh.org/
> 
> Idea #1: is BATMAN worth considering using as part of the layer 2 routing in 
> Tinc?

I do not know if it would improve anything. Also, a VPN is an overlay network,
so it works on top of an already existing network, where you can more or less
assume all nodes can already talk to each other (barring NAT and firewalls of
course). Tinc's internal routing protocol, which is similar to OSPF, is used
only as a fallback for when packets cannot be sent directly to the destination.
This is not something other routing protocols take into account AFAIK (mostly
because they are not designed for overlay networks).

An idea I have is to expose the connections to various other nodes as VLANs on
the tap interface, or creating multiple tap interfaces, so you can run any
routing daemon on top of them, without having to hack an existing routing
protocol into tinc.

> Idea #2: would it be possible to embed BATMAN as an option to avoid having 
> to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets?

Why do you need to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets in the first place? And if
you already run a routing daemon on top of tinc, I do not see why you cannot
use BATMAN on it as well without having to embed it?

--

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet / with kind regards,
     Guus Sliepen <guus@...>
Permalink | Reply |
headers
Michael Adams | 29 Apr 2011 15:25
Favicon

Re: Re: Suggestion: use Open-Mesh/BATMAN to help with layer 2/3 routing?

Thanks for replying. Interesting stuff on your response to #1. As for 
#2, since I'm using tinc as Ethernet interfaces, I've had to use Quagga 
to maintain an OSPFv3 routing setup. It works nicely: my thoughts on 
BATMAN were leaning towards the idea that tinc could implement it so you 
could dump use of external routing, and create a self-maintaining 
network. I'd be glad to test out having my network not rely on a central 
point.

On 2:59 PM, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:07:01AM -0400, Michael Adams wrote:
>
>> http://www.open-mesh.org/
>>
>> Idea #1: is BATMAN worth considering using as part of the layer 2 routing in
>> Tinc?
> I do not know if it would improve anything. Also, a VPN is an overlay network,
> so it works on top of an already existing network, where you can more or less
> assume all nodes can already talk to each other (barring NAT and firewalls of
> course). Tinc's internal routing protocol, which is similar to OSPF, is used
> only as a fallback for when packets cannot be sent directly to the destination.
> This is not something other routing protocols take into account AFAIK (mostly
> because they are not designed for overlay networks).
>
> An idea I have is to expose the connections to various other nodes as VLANs on
> the tap interface, or creating multiple tap interfaces, so you can run any
> routing daemon on top of them, without having to hack an existing routing
> protocol into tinc.
>
>> Idea #2: would it be possible to embed BATMAN as an option to avoid having
>> to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets?
> Why do you need to use Quagga for routing v6 subnets in the first place? And if
> you already run a routing daemon on top of tinc, I do not see why you cannot
> use BATMAN on it as well without having to embed it?
>
Permalink | Reply |

Gmane