[Ninux-Wireless] tinc CPU optimization
Gioacchino Mazzurco
gmazzurco89 a gmail.com
Dom 3 Lug 2011 22:20:13 CEST
> come vedi che batman frammenta? se usi batctl td dovresti vedere i
me ne accorgo perche' schizza la cpu
che parametro devo passare a td per farmi dire la dimensione dei pacchetti?
1280 l'ho settato a mano sulle interfacce sui computer con iperf
Il 03 luglio 2011 19:47, Antonio Quartulli <ordex a autistici.org> ha scritto:
> On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 07:41:24 +0200, ZioPRoTo (Saverio Proto) wrote:
>> OK sembra un problema specifico di batman... non so aiutarti.
>>
>> Saverio
>>
>>
>> Il 03 luglio 2011 16:43, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> > nonostante l' mtu sia settato a 1280 ( quello dei pc con iperf ) la
>> > cpu della pico schizzava uguale, ho disabilitato la frammentazione su
>> > batman-adv la banda ora resta piu' o meno uguale ma la cpu non schizza
>> > piu'...
>> >
>> > perche' batman frammenta anche se non dovrebbe essere necessario? (
>> > wireshark dice che i pacchetti che escono dalla mia macchina sono
>> > ~700byte e l'mtu e' settato a 1280)
>
> come vedi che batman frammenta? se usi batctl td dovresti vedere i
> singoli pacchetti (e puoi appurare se sono frammentati o meno).
> E poi dove leggi l'MTU a 1280?
>
> Comunque hai detto che usi ipv6 con pmtu discovery giusto? quindi i
> pacchetti verrano creati della dimensione esatta per non essere
> frammentati
>
>> >
>> > l' interfaccia tunnel che ha nome nnx-adv ha l'mtu settato a 1400
>> > mentre quello del bridge che contiene bat0 e' 1350
>> >
>> > bat0 invece riporta 1373 nonostante quello del bridge sia 1350... (
>> > questo credo sia causato dal fatto che ho disabilitato la
>> > fragmentation su batman-adv )
>> >
>> > root a OpenWrt:~# brctl show
>> > bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
>> > br-clients 8000.7aa872dfafbe no bat0
>> >
>> > root a OpenWrt:~# ip a s
>> > 1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 16436 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN
>> > link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
>> > inet 127.0.0.1/8 brd 127.255.255.255 scope host lo
>> > inet6 ::1/128 scope host
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > 2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
>> > state UP qlen 1000
>> > link/ether 00:15:6d:7b:96:7a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>> > inet 192.168.1.21/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth0
>> > inet6 fe80::215:6dff:fe7b:967a/64 scope link
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > 4: wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1524 qdisc mq state
>> > UNKNOWN qlen 1000
>> > link/ether 00:15:6d:7a:96:7a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>> > inet 192.168.1.21/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global wlan0
>> > inet6 2001:470:ca42:ee:ab:15:6d7a:967a/64 scope global
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > inet6 fe80::215:6dff:fe7a:967a/64 scope link
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > 5: bat0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1373 qdisc pfifo_fast
>> > state UNKNOWN qlen 1000
>> > link/ether 7a:a8:72:df:af:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>> > 7: br-clients: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1350 qdisc
>> > noqueue state UNKNOWN
>> > link/ether 7a:a8:72:df:af:be brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>> > inet 192.168.167.21/24 brd 192.168.167.255 scope global br-clients
>> > inet6 2001:470:ca42:ee:ab:15:6d7b:967a/64 scope global
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > inet6 fe80::78a8:72ff:fedf:afbe/64 scope link
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> > 8: nnx-adv: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1400 qdisc
>> > pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN qlen 500
>> > link/ether a2:19:0b:84:4f:5e brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>> > inet6 fe80::a019:bff:fe84:4f5e/64 scope link
>> > valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
>> >
>> > Il 03 luglio 2011 16:12, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> >> e' strano..
>> >>
>> >> perche' io sto usando ipv6 per fare i test quindi il path mtu
>> >> discovery dovrebbe funzionare e in effetti riducendo l'mtu a 1280 e
>> >> disabilitando cipher ottengo un misero raddoppio della banda quando va
>> >> bene...
>> >>
>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 14:37, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha scritto:
>> >>> Quello che va meglio :)
>> >>> Ce ne saranno una dozzina nel kernel, aggiungili.
>> >>> Così, a naso, vista la natura particolare del canale, un algo abbastanza
>> >>> tollerante alle perdite/timeout.
>> >>> Ma questo solo per capire sa cambia qualcosa o siamo sempre con gli stessi
>> >>> valori..
>> >>>
>> >>> Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 14:23, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>> ha scritto:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> non so quale usa di default tu quale mi consigli di usare?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Il 03 luglio 2011 14:18, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha scritto:
>> >>>> > Bene, ora puoi ripetere le prove cambiando l'algoritmo di controllo di
>> >>>> > congestione sul client iperf.
>> >>>> > Cosa stai usando ora? Reno?
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 14:09, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> altri test fissando la quantita'
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-62.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 270 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-55.3 sec 2.00 MBytes 304 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-64.2 sec 2.00 MBytes 261 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-58.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 285 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-99.6 sec 2.00 MBytes 169 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-96.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 174 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-89.8 sec 2.00 MBytes 187 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-66.4 sec 2.00 MBytes 253 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-99.9 sec 2.00 MBytes 161 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> [ 4] 0.0-88.1 sec 2.00 MBytes 190 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:57, Gioacchino Mazzurco <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com> ha
>> >>>> >> scritto:
>> >>>> >> > senza tinc la configurazione rimane uguale ma il traffico al posto di
>> >>>> >> > passare dal tunnel via internet passa solo attraverso i link wireless
>> >>>> >> >
>> >>>> >> > Il 03 luglio 2011 13:51, Antonio Quartulli <ordex a autistici.org> ha
>> >>>> >> > scritto:
>> >>>> >> >> On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 01:48:37 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote:
>> >>>> >> >>> il test e' sempre PC( iperf -c ) <-- cavo lan --> Piconstation (
>> >>>> >> >>> btman-adv + tinc )<-- tinc ---> PC( batman-adv + tinc + iperf -s)
>> >>>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >> anche senza TINC la configurazione rimane uguale? scusa ma non ho
>> >>>> >> >> capito
>> >>>> >> >> questo daalle mail precedenti
>> >>>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo
>> >>>> >> >>> >deviati..
>> >>>> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> quei test non sono fatti in parallelo sono fatti in modo
>> >>>> >> >>> sequenziale
>> >>>> >> >>> quindi volta per volta c'e' ne e' attivo solo uno
>> >>>> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:40, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> > Magari se scegliessi un test "unico" sarebbe anche meglio,
>> >>>> >> >>> > usa un vincolo temporale o quantitativo, sti valori sono troppo
>> >>>> >> >>> > deviati..
>> >>>> >> >>> > Se non mi dicessi della CPU a palla, guardando sta roba ti direi
>> >>>> >> >>> > che
>> >>>> >> >>> > è
>> >>>> >> >>> > congestione..
>> >>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:31, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> altra serie di test
>> >>>> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.8 sec 384 KBytes 167 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.5 sec 384 KBytes 180 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.0 sec 384 KBytes 157 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.1 sec 384 KBytes 149 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-32.3 sec 384 KBytes 97.3 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-20.8 sec 384 KBytes 151 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-27.7 sec 256 KBytes 75.8 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.8 sec 256 KBytes 96.3 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.3 sec 512 KBytes 294 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-14.0 sec 512 KBytes 299 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-37.6 sec 512 KBytes 112 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-18.7 sec 512 KBytes 224 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.3 sec 384 KBytes 148 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-17.9 sec 640 KBytes 293 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-24.8 sec 512 KBytes 169 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-23.5 sec 512 KBytes 178 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-16.4 sec 384 KBytes 192 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >> [ 4] 0.0-21.4 sec 384 KBytes 147 Kbits/sec
>> >>>> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> ho spento dnsmasq che non serviva a niente e andiamo di poco ma
>> >>>> >> >>> >> meglio
>> >>>> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:16, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > Il sintomo è abbastanza chiaro, ma dubito sia colpa della CPU
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > o
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > meglio,
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > secondo me qualcosa
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > è stata scritta male, 100Kbps sono davvero ridicoli. A maggior
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > ragione
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > quando ste cpu hanno anche qualche set dedicato
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > alla crittografia simmetrica...
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 13:04, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> ma il problema sembra proprio l'eccessivo utilizzo di cpu per
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> la
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> vpn
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> perche' stando in ssh sulla picostation mentre c'e' traffico
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> che
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> passa
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> sulla vpn diventa completamente unresponsive non sente
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> nemmeno
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> ctrl+c
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> sulla shell... quando il traffico finisce mi esegue tutto
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> quello
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> che
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> gli avevo mandato nel fratempo
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 13:01, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> PC)?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> > dovrei installarmi anche batman-adv sul pc...
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> > Il 03 luglio 2011 12:58, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> > scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> E' chiaro che non può essere il tuo upstream,
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> ma sei certo che il collo di bottiglia non sia nella
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> capacità
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> di sta
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> rete
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> mesh tunnellata?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> Hai provato a lanciare 2 iperf in parallelo?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> Hai la possibilità di usare una CPU + potente (tincare dal
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> PC)?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:34, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> la picostation a e la z sono la stessa picostation...
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> dalla
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> picostation a posso decidere se accendere tinc e quindi
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> far
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> passare
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> traffico mesh su internet oppure se usare solo i link
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> dal computer pocco decidere sia di usare la picostation
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> come
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> gw sia
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> di
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> usare il router adsl
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> le casistiche quindi sono 3
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> iperf via internet senza tinc >500KB/s
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh senza tinc ~ 20Kb/s
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> iperf via mesh tunnellata su internet con tinc ~100Kb/s
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:27, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > Fammi capire:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > - tra le tua pico(A) e quella(Z) con l'adsl ci sono
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > diversi nodi
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > e
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > con
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > iperf
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > hai risultati di 20Kbps (A->Z) in L3 puro ? Mentre se
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > usi
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > tinc va
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > a
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > 100Kbps?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > - chi sono gli end-point tinc?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 12:12, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> senza tinc praticamente non c'e' connettivita' ( a
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> volte
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> va ma
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> roba
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> tipo 20k perche' sono un sacco di op alcuni dei quali
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> fanno
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> schifo...)
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> se invece faccio iperf passando per internet senza
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> tinc
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> ottengo
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> risultati sempre sopra i 500KB/s
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 12:01, Darkman <darkman a darkman.it>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > Hai gia controllato i valori tra le 2 pico con e
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > senza
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > tinc?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:45, Gioacchino Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> iperf -c su computer che usa una picostation come
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> gateway ->
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Picostation con tinc <- adsl 8 megabit -> iperf
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> --server su
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> eigenlab.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Il 03 luglio 2011 11:33, Darkman
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> <darkman a darkman.it>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> ha
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > 100kbps mi pare davvero troppo poco anche per
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > quelle
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > cessonanocpu.
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Come li hai ottenuti sti valori?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Il giorno 03 luglio 2011 11:10, Gioacchino
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Mazzurco
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > <gmazzurco89 a gmail.com>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > ha scritto:
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Ciao a tutti!
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Facendo dei test mi sono accorto che le vpn con
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> tinc
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> installato
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> sui
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> nodi ci vanno max a 100k anche se la banda
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> dell'adsl e'
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> molta
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> di
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu'... ho cominciato a cercare ed ho letto che
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> la
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> causa
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e'
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> probabilmente la CPU che non ce la fa a fare
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> decryption
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> piu' velocemente di cosi'
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> leggendo il man di tinc ho trovato questo
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Cipher = cipher (blowfish)
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> The symmetric cipher algorithm used
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> to
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encrypt
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> UDP
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packets. Any cipher supported by OpenSSL is
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> recognised.
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Furâ€
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> thermore, specifying "none" will
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> turn
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> off
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> packet
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption. It is best to use only those
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> ciphers
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> which
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> support
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> CBC mode.
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> mettendo none dovrebbe essere disabilitata l'
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> encryption e
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> quindi
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> avere piu' banda, il meccanismo degli host con
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> il
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> file con
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> la
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> chiave
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> pubblica continua a funzionare disabilitando la
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cifratura,
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> e
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> soprattutto bastera' aggiungere quell'opzione li
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> oppure
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> bisogna
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> cambiare altre conf?
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >>
>> >>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> >
>> >>>> >> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >>> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >>> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >> --
>> >>>> >> >> Antonio Quartulli
>> >>>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >> ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
>> >>>> >> >> Ernesto "Che" Guevara
>> >>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >> >>
>> >>>> >> >
>> >>>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> >> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> >> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> >> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>>> > Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> > Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> > http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> Wireless mailing list
>> >>>> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Wireless mailing list
>> >>> Wireless a ml.ninux.org
>> >>> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>
> --
> Antonio Quartulli
>
> ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
> Ernesto "Che" Guevara
>
Maggiori informazioni sulla lista
Wireless