[Battlemesh] WBMv6 - Hardware / Sponsoring

Roger Baig Viñas roger.baig at gmail.com
Mon Oct 29 15:19:06 UTC 2012


Hi,

On 29 October 2012 15:57, Simon Wunderlich
<simon.wunderlich at s2003.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
> Hey Aaron, Pau,
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 08:51:50AM +0100, L. Aaron Kaplan wrote:
>> > I don't know which is the exact idea of Aaron (he will clarify it). But I
>> > think Confine project can provide some devices (probably Alix boards) for
>> > the testbeds, as far I know it should not be a problem.
>> ok, I did not have this in mind - but why not :)
>>
>> > We can also join the Confine testbed with the WBM testbed through VPN link.
>> > If there is an OpenWRT image ready, it is very easy to deploy by the
>> > Confine testbed (just a few commands).
>> >
>> That's exactly what I had in mind!
>>
>> The benefit for CONFINE would be that the WBM test-drives our federated CONFINE testbeds and our server deployment software
>> and the benefit for WBM would be to have a larger real-world testbed with better hardware than Foneras and Linksyses.
>> In fact, since the openwrt image that Pau mentioned has LXC and thus some sort of virtualization, we can run multiple routing protocols and tests in parallel (to some extent).
>>
>> win-win.
>>
>> > Another point would be to used Confine firmware for the WBM devices. It is
>> > and OpenWRT with LXC support and a set of scripts to easy create containers
>> > with an existing image.
>> And that seems like another good idea :) - but I did not have this in mind :)
>
> A permament testbed is a really nice idea, and it is a good idea to try it out -
> however, it should not be used to replace the local hands-on tests we do in the
> wireless battle mesh, in my opionion. We might find wifi driver bugs, upgrade the
> drivers, change positions of nodes to get better connection, reboot them, building
> some wired backbone ... things we can't do so easily in a remote testbed.

Indeed, it is not about replacing anything but complementing.
Permanent testbeds can be used, for instance, to test firmware
deployments before the WBM to save time.

>
> Maybe we can have some workshop to get to know how the confine testbed work? I'd see

Good! First proposal for the agenda!

> this a parallel event to the testing with the local APs.

+1

>
> Also, is it now possible to use kernel-based meshing stuff like 802.11s or batman-adv
> with the confine firmware?

This is still an open issue. Maybe someone from  802.11s or/and
batman-adv could give some hints to do so, or even better, get
involved to add this support ;-)

>
> Cheers,
>         Simon
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlCOmU0ACgkQrzg/fFk7axYWqACfb3Dswb2d9X3D0teY8xQvmwXr
> DP8AoOxkJYZ2ae1aI4qaxD1ZNibL8u/U
> =TKjq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Battlemesh mailing list
> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh
>



-- 
roger


More information about the Battlemesh mailing list