<div>On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 1:00 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:battlemesh-request@ml.ninux.org">battlemesh-request@ml.ninux.org</a>></span> wrote:</div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:20:54 +0100<br>
From: Axel Neumann <<a href="mailto:neumann@cgws.de">neumann@cgws.de</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Battlemesh] Battlemesh v5 tests<br><br>
2) intuitively deactivated and reactivated nodes to save power.</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Power outages are rather seldom. Especially short-time ones.<br>
But what happens is that nodes are turned down intuitively to save power<br></blockquote><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">I agree with axel, that real (or administrative) power outages last a little longer,..</div>
<div>(so protocols usually have some time to timeout stuff)</div><div><br></div><div>But i would vote to not ignore the "reboot instead of debug" mentality of many mesh network users,..</div><div><br></div><div>
So its a valid testcase, but to keep realism do not perform it too often (-;</div><div>(As its hopefully not the typical mesh-network users full time "hobby" to power on/off there routers)</div><div><br></div><div>
And luckily many mesh (non-)users also have the, "just ignore it" (as it will fix itself) mentality,.. (common especially in older/settled networks)</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Therefore I would actually vote for something like decreasing tx-power,<br>
turn off the interface<br></blockquote><div><br>hmm a good option, as its works fast and is scriptable.<br>(but i agree its not a real-live test)</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If this is not possible, what about turning them down for 5 minutes?<br></blockquote><div>I guess this could make these tests take some time,.. </div><div><br></div><div>Markus</div><div> </div><div>p.s. regarding olsrd, if it knows that is has to shutdown (e.g. receives a SIGTERM) it immedialtely sends out some goodbye messages (infact just normal oslrd messages saying i have no links, and no neighbours = forget me (-;</div>
<div><br></div><div>Depending on firmware (how and how fast it shuts down) this also works on a reboot, and there are usually no issues with old seqno, topology information, for olsrd on a reboot.</div><div><br></div><div>
Of course plugging out power does not give olsrd (or other protocol with similar features) time to say goodbye.<br><br>And i fear if installation allows it (i.e. easy user-accesible power source of the routers) <br>such real powercycles might be more common as reboots (via gui or shell)</div>
</div></div>