<html><head></head><body>Yea, I think with the info you have its plus the debugging info on the networks we have seen (if those who have seen this could send that) we can create a close approximation and monitor it closely.<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Dan Staples <danstaples@opentechinstitute.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On Sun 04 Aug 2013 12:25:35 PM EDT, Ben West wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">It unfortunately wouldn't be possible for me to revert these node back<br />to known bag configuration and do packet capture, since the nodes are<br />under active use by folks other than me (their patience can be finite<br />;). Usually, my encounters with this issue spring from complaints<br />about nodes losing their Internet route and needing recovery. So, the<br />testing results I would be able to share for this instance are going<br />to be limited to largely empirical results.<br /><br /><br />On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Dan Staples<br /><danstaples@opentechinstitute.org<br /><mailto:danstaples@opentechinstitute.org>> wrote:<br /><br />On Sat 03 Aug 2013 10:08:56 PM EDT, Will Hawkins wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex;
border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">Ben,<br /><br />Thank you for sending this out to the list. Keep us updated on your<br />progress. We will work through your recommendations on our end<br /></blockquote>and see<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">what comes of it. Thanks again!<br /><br />Will<br /><br />On 08/03/2013 08:38 PM, Ben West wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi All,<br /><br />I'm emailing here in follow-up to a recent thread on<br /></blockquote></blockquote>commotion-discuss<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">about repeater nodes not reliably having their
internet-bound<br /></blockquote></blockquote>traffic<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">routed.<br /><br />In particular, I was seeing my own repeater nodes, both 1-hop<br /></blockquote></blockquote>way and<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">especially 2-hops away, apparently losing their connection to the<br />Internet once the local OLSRd instance had inserted its tnl_*<br /></blockquote></blockquote>interface<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">(i.e. a few minutes after power up). I'm highlighting the<br /></blockquote></blockquote>instance of a<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">node 2-hops away, since in practice that can be difficult to<br /></blockquote></blockquote>replicate.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">Below is the readme about the SmartGateway feature. Do please<br /></blockquote></blockquote>note in<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8;
padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">particular the recommendation to add an iptables rules to the<br /></blockquote></blockquote>gateway<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">node, clamping all packets leaving the mesh to the same MTU as<br /></blockquote></blockquote>what is<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">used by the OLSRd SmartGateway tunnels.</blockquote><br /><br /></blockquote><a
href="http://svn.dd-wrt.com/browser/src/router/olsrd/README-Olsr-Extensions">http://svn.dd-wrt.com/browser/src/router/olsrd/README-Olsr-Extensions</a><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">This seemed to resonate with a sporadic problem I'd been having<br /></blockquote></blockquote>with<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">repeater nodes occasionally not seeing their Internet-bound traffic<br />correctly routed, despite all routing tables appearing valid.<br /></blockquote></blockquote>These<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left:
1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">repeater nodes restored their Internet connection when I<br /></blockquote></blockquote>enabled the<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">'mtu_fix' option on their local firewall. But not consistently so,<br />making the problem very challenging to resolve.<br /><br />So, following the advice from the readme, I added this to<br />/etc/firewall.user on my gateway node (eth0 is its wired uplink):<br /><br />iptables -A FORWARD -o eth0 -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j<br /></blockquote></blockquote>TCPMSS<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left:
1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">--set-mss 1480<br /><br />On the gateway node with wired WAN and LAN ports, in addition<br /></blockquote></blockquote>to the<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">mesh interface, I set these firewall zones in /etc/config/firewall:<br /><br />config zone<br />option name 'mesh'<br />option network 'mesh'<br />option input 'ACCEPT'<br />option output 'ACCEPT'<br />option forward 'ACCEPT'<br />option 'masq' '1'<br /><br />config zone<br />option name 'wan'<br />option output 'ACCEPT'<br />option masq '1'<br />option input 'DROP'<br />option forward 'ACCEPT'<br /><br />config zone<br />option input 'ACCEPT'<br />option output 'ACCEPT'<br />option forward
'ACCEPT'<br />option name 'lan'<br />option network 'lan'<br /><br />config forwarding<br />option src 'mesh'<br />option dest 'wan'<br /><br />config forwarding<br />option src 'lan'<br />option dest 'wan'<br /><br />config 'forwarding'<br />option 'src' 'mesh'<br />option 'dest' 'mesh'<br /><br />Next, on repeater nodes with only one LAN port (counter-intuitively<br />labeled 'wan'), these are the firewall zones:<br /><br />config 'zone'<br />option 'name' 'mesh'<br />option 'input' 'ACCEPT'<br />option 'output' 'ACCEPT'<br />option 'forward' 'ACCEPT'<br /><br />config zone<br />option name wan<br />option input ACCEPT<br />option output ACCEPT<br />option forward ACCEPT<br />option masq 1<br /><br />config 'forwarding'<br />option 'src' 'wan'<br />option 'dest' 'mesh'<br /><br />config 'forwarding'<br />option 'src' 'mesh'<br />option 'dest' 'mesh'<br /><br />In particular, note how the 'masq' option is enabled on the<br /></blockquote></blockquote>zone
'mesh'<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">only for the gateway node, but not on the repeater nodes.<br /></blockquote></blockquote>Likewise,<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">'masq' is enabled on the zone corresponding to the local LAN<br /></blockquote></blockquote>port of the<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">repeater nodes, but not on the LAN port of the gateway node.
For<br />Commotion-OpenWRT, the firewall zones of the LAN ports would be<br />equivalent to those of the APs of each node.<br /><br />This configuration described above appears to be what works for<br /></blockquote></blockquote>using<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">the SmartGateway feature with OLSRd v0.6.5.4-commotion-0.1-1.<br /><br />I'm trying to review the firewall rules that commotiond is<br /></blockquote></blockquote>generating<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">for gateway and repeater nodes, to see if they follow.<br /></blockquote></blockquote>However, I'm<br
/><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">posting to the listserv now in case someone else happens to see an<br />oversight in how Commotion-OpenWRT is deploying OLSRd and<br /></blockquote></blockquote>firewall config.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Ben West <ben@gowasabi.net<br /><</blockquote></blockquote>mailto:ben@gowasabi.net><br /><<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px
solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">mailto:ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net>>> wrote:<br /><br />Hi All,<br /><br />I can confirm having encountered similar issues specifically<br />repeater nodes not correctly masq'ing AP traffic to the<br /></blockquote></blockquote>Internet,<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">while gateway nodes do. My own problems were encountered<br /></blockquote></blockquote>running<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">both private APs and coovachilli APs (as opposed to<br /></blockquote></blockquote>nodogsplash) on<br /><blockquote
class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">nodes running the WasabiNet firmware, not<br /></blockquote></blockquote>Commotion-OpenWRT. However<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">the firewall config is quite similar.<br /><br />So, on repeater nodes I have the 'masq' option enabled for<br /></blockquote></blockquote>zones<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">mesh, ap1, and ap2 (i.e. public and private
APs). On<br /></blockquote></blockquote>gateway nodes,<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">it seems that I need to have 'masq' disabled for zones ap1<br /></blockquote></blockquote>and ap2.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Ryan Gerety<br /><gerety@opentechinstitute.org<br /><</blockquote></blockquote>mailto:gerety@opentechinstitute.org><br /><mailto:gerety@opentechinstitute.org<br /><mailto:gerety@opentechinstitute.org>>><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid
#ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">wrote:<br /><br />After a further chat with Preston, this seems like it<br /></blockquote></blockquote>*might* be<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">the same problem I encountered at the Hackerspace in Tunis.<br />When using the AP of the gateway node the client can<br /></blockquote></blockquote>access the<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">internet and when on another mesh node (say via ssh)<br /></blockquote></blockquote>you can<br
/><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">access the internet, however, when you are on the AP of<br /></blockquote></blockquote>another<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">node you cannot access the internet.<br /><br />I had sent this to the tech list about two weeks ago,<br /></blockquote></blockquote>and in the<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">office Seamus and Griffin thought it
might be a zone issue.<br />Seamus and Griffin did you discover what the problem<br /></blockquote></blockquote>actually<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">was? Were you able to replicate the problem?<br /><br />Best,<br />Ryan<br /><br /><br /><snip><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />--<br />Ben West<br /><a href="http://gowasabi.net">http://gowasabi.net</a><br />ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net><br /><</blockquote></blockquote>mailto:ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net>><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">314-246-9434 <tel:314-246-9434>
<tel:314-246-9434<br /><</blockquote></blockquote>tel:314-246-9434>><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">--<br />Ben West<br /><a href="http://gowasabi.net">http://gowasabi.net</a><br />ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net><br /><</blockquote></blockquote>mailto:ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net>><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;">314-246-9434 <tel:314-246-9434> <tel:314-246-9434<br /><</blockquote></blockquote>tel:314-246-9434>><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:
0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;"><hr /><br />Commotion-dev mailing list<br />Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net<br /><</blockquote></blockquote>mailto:Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #8ae234; padding-left: 1ex;"><a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev</a></blockquote><br /><hr /><br />Commotion-dev mailing list<br />Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net<br /><</blockquote>mailto:Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left:
1ex;"><a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev</a></blockquote><br /><br />Would we be able to verify the MTU problem by doing packet captures<br />along the route from a repeater to a gateway, and checking the MTU of<br />packets that get through versus those that get dropped?<br /><br />--<br />Dan Staples<br /><br />Open Technology Institute<br /><a href="https://commotionwireless.net">https://commotionwireless.net</a><br />OpenPGP key: <a href="http://disman.tl/pgp.asc">http://disman.tl/pgp.asc</a><br />Fingerprint: 2480 095D 4B16 436F 35AB 7305 F670 74ED BD86 43A9<br /><hr /><br />Commotion-dev mailing list<br />Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net<br /><mailto:Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net><br /><a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev</a><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />--<br />Ben West<br /><a
href="http://gowasabi.net">http://gowasabi.net</a><br />ben@gowasabi.net <mailto:ben@gowasabi.net><br />314-246-9434</blockquote><br />We could try it on our test networks to diagnose the problem, if you <br />think it would lead to useful data. I'm just trying to think of ways we <br />could test your hypothesis about the MTU issue...<br /><br />--<br />Dan Staples<br /><br />Open Technology Institute<br /><a href="https://commotionwireless.net">https://commotionwireless.net</a><br />OpenPGP key: <a href="http://disman.tl/pgp.asc">http://disman.tl/pgp.asc</a><br />Fingerprint: 2480 095D 4B16 436F 35AB 7305 F670 74ED BD86 43A9<br /><hr /><br />Commotion-dev mailing list<br />Commotion-dev@lists.chambana.net<br /><a href="https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev">https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/commotion-dev</a><br /><br /><br /></pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>