Hello All,

There has been a large interest within our ham community in the MESH project in Ventura County California.  The Ojai Valley area already has an extensive MESH network in operation.  I incorporated a MESH onto my uWave Bridge system via the dtdlink parameters to tie Ojai to the remainder of the County.  This is being done as a way of furthering interest in MESH.  With the initial setup complete I can direct connect to every node that is directly connected via the Bridge Network over the Ethernet connection.  I can NOT, however connect to another node any other way.

Under the Tab MESH STATUS, I can see Current Neighbors both RF and dtdlink connections.  In addition I can under Remote Nodes, I can see many nodes. In either case I cannot connect to these stations.  I understand that the links do not point to an actual address only a descriptor.  So I have the list of RF address that correspond to the listed call signed and still cannot connect to them

Any RF connection is just not happening.  I have tried several setups to no avail;

Setup 1

Basic Setup Tab, LAN parameters:

Lan Mode=Nat

IP Address = 172.27.27.31 (addresses are incremental on each node 32, 33, 34 and so on)

Netmask= 255.255.255.0

DHCP Server= off

Setup 2

Basic Setup Tab, LAN parameters:

Lan Mode=1 host Direct

IP Address = set by 1 host Direct

Netmask= set by 1 host Direct

DHCP Server= off

In both cases I have NOT adjusted the WiFi or WAN parameters.

I have also setup PORT Forwarding on Ports:20, 21, 22, 23, 25 ,53, 58, 123, 689, 1978, 2222, 8080 as described in another post.

I am currently using all Ubiquity equipment.

The Ubiquity backbone is setup in bridge mode.  Nanobridge and Powerbridge.

The Ubiquity PoE switches, I have enables a VLAN2 for all the ports and switches associated with MESH.

The current 2.4GHz access points are Ubiquity Rocket M2 with sector antennas and Ubiquity Picostation 2HP.

One final connection question:

If I have Access points connected via dtdlink, is there a way I can force a connection through the dtdlink and not over the RF path.  Or an EXCLUED RF relay point-to-point table so connections are forced through the dtdlink.

Thank you for your time and hopefully your answers.

Paul

WD6EBY

Attachments
 HelpBlock.jpg [66 KB]

DtDlink is not intended to be run over a wireless backhaul. If packet loss rate exceeds 5% the link will be considered down and be disconnected. DtDlink is only for LOW LOSS DIRECT WIRED connections

"I have also setup PORT Forwarding on Ports:20, 21, 22, 23, 25 ,53, 58, 123, 689, 1978, 2222, 8080 as described in another post."  I'm not sure why you are forwarding these ports on the port forwarding  page, at least 5 of these are ports used by the node and should not be forwarded.

"... is there a way I can force a connection through the dtdlink and not over the RF path."

No, you can not force the connection to always use DtDLINK, the node will choose the link with the LEAST COST (ETX value)

DtDLINK interface have a cost of 0.1 compared to the MINIMUM COST for a wifi link being 1.0. There are still edge scenarios where going over RF will be better than going over dtdlink based on path  but they should be very rare as a single wifi hop costs 10x as much as a DTDLINK if it chooses that  route its because it either has a good enough direct RF shot to it that going direct is better OR the hops on the other side of  the DTDLink are just as bad as the hop it can take direct.

"With the initial setup complete I can direct connect to every node that is directly connected via the Bridge Network over the Ethernet connection.  I can NOT, however connect to another node any other way."

TraceRoute results please.  Also make sure you are running 1.1.2, some bugs existed on NAT mode in 1.1.0/1.1.1

OK I understand what you are saying.  I did have a related question pertaining to the LAN Host Addressing.  If I were given control over this address scheme, I beleive that I could bridge (dtdlinking)  together many MESH units Lan.  I have done some sudo successful address manipulation have been able to connect via a dtdlink path.  I believe that this scheme is workable.

This is no more that what already existed on the stock Linksys or Ubiquity router port being able to set the address that I choose.   

So in essence, ability to control the entire Lan Host addressing limited to say 13 addresses.

With this I believe I could truly bridge these devices together.

I do not have the knowledge to SSH into the unit and make the changes I have suggested, so I am turning to you.

If needed, please contact me so we can discuss this further.

Respectfully,

Paul Strauss

WD6EBY

If you use supported devices for your backbone you can do this already.

DtDlinkd 2 devices together. If you use DtDlink on a 2.4ghz node to a 5.8ghz node and then mesh out over the. 5.8 (even if it's a PtP link)  the mesh protocol extends across and now the 2 independent meshes are one big mesh like you want.

Over wifi it used a less strict requierment It's just the vlan 2  protocol that is only meant for low/no loss links.

I can not change the 5.8GHz system to the MESH technology as the 5.8 is being used by several other volunteer groups.  This is why I wanted to find a way of bridging into my existing system.

If you have the time I would like to speak with you on the phone.  I have left my number on your machine.

Respectfully

Paul Strauss

WD6EBY

Camarillo California

Received VM (went to a number I don't normally access but can get to me with time)

Bit late to be calling though.

Let me know via @amsat some good times for you and I will give you a call.  There are a couple options depending how flexible you want it to be and how exactly your network protocol passing is worked out and varying scenarios if complexity to setup.