[Ninux-Wireless] tinc CPU optimization
Antonio Quartulli
ordex a autistici.org
Dom 3 Lug 2011 22:30:51 CEST
On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 10:26:29 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote:
> ho provato ma viene un listone enorme di warning unknown packet type
azz :/ quei warning rompono parecchio...visto che ora l'interesse e`
capire se escono pacchetti frammentati o no, un semplice
| grep -v warning
potrebbe aiutare? almeno per capire..
>
> Il 03 luglio 2011 22:24, Antonio Quartulli <ordex a autistici.org> ha scritto:
> > On dom, lug 03, 2011 at 10:20:13 +0200, Gioacchino Mazzurco wrote:
> >> > 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?
> >
> > questo non credo tu possa farlo. Cioe` le informazioni sono quelle che
> > vedi, non ha opzioni per dirti roba in piu`, a quel punto ti conviene
> > usare tcpdump vero :P
> >
> > Pero` tramite -p puoi dirgli di visualizzare solo i pacchetti unicast
> > frammentati. A quel punto vedi se vengon fuori pacchetti frammentati o
> > no
> >
> >> 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
> >> >
> >
> > --
> > Antonio Quartulli
> >
> > ..each of us alone is worth nothing..
> > Ernesto "Che" Guevara
> >
--
Antonio Quartulli
..each of us alone is worth nothing..
Ernesto "Che" Guevara
Maggiori informazioni sulla lista
Wireless