Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[nos-bbs] Parellel Routes and the routing table

George [ham] VerDuin k8rra at ameritech.net
Mon Mar 1 01:57:14 UTC 2010


Hey Jay, thanks for the response.

On 02/28/2010 05:59 PM, Jay Nugent wrote:
> Greetings Skip,
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010, George [ham] VerDuin wrote:
>
>    
>> Thus I defined two gateways using the two commands:
>> route add 44.0.0.0/8  vhf 44.102.132.1  2
>> route add 44.0.0.0/8  vhf 44.102.134.1  5
>> Which define two gateways with the ...132... host [metric=2] preferred
>> over the ...134... host [metric=5].
>>
>>      
>
>     The AMPRnet (Hamgates) only "know" how to route to you at your 'HOME'
> Hamgate.
I do understand the single path nature of the routes *to* 
44.102.132.20/32 k8rra today...
I also accept the non-symmetric path I experienced today as being todays 
norm.
Actually the present definition is not an issue.

> >>SNIP<<And YOU will have to point
> your outgoing 44/8 routes toward the Alternate Hamgate.
>
>     Your choices really are:  Pick Hamgate "A" -or- Pick Hamgate "B".
Quoting the doc:

    *"<metric>* This value is used in computing a route choice when
    there are multiple paths or breaking tie destinations. The numeric
    integer must fall between a 1 value is close and a 31 is far."

While I know your direction of picking "A" or "B" works, the way jnos is 
*supposed(?) to work* permits parallel routes with a tie-breaker.  After 
I defined parallel gateway paths jnos seems to have dropped the 
preferred route that I defined.  So one issue is if jnos *should* have 
dropped the first route.  What I don't know is if I should re-write the 
doc.  If the first route I defined should be in the table, then I guess 
I need to go read some c code to find out why not.  I guess I can do 
that, but I can't resolve the "should".

>     Now if you wish to use the 44.102.0.x subnet, we place MOBILE stations
> in that group.  And we used to use the RSPF protocol to route to them.
> Currently *NONE* of the Michigan Hamgates have RSPF configured and I
> simply have no time to research how this is done.  If you would like to do
> the research, provide a config that works for everybody, and doesn't break
> anything, then perhaps we could deploy this state wide :)
>
>     Investigate using the RSPF protocol (Radio Shortest Path First).  You
> will have to do some Google searches to find out how this works and how it
> is configured.  Best of luck!
>    
OK, fair enough.  Since I have a mobile rig, how about plan to assign a 
new mobile IP to me next time you get into the admin mode, and alert 
Dave and Don I may be asking for some special config at their nodes to 
make RSPF work.  I'll be happy to add the configuration requirements 
into jnoswiki.

At this moment I see my original question and a functioning RSPF as two 
separate issues.  True -- RSPF might rely on a working parallel route 
algorithm so the two issues may be joined at the hip.  But they are two 
issues.

Thanks again Jay.
Skip



More information about the nos-bbs mailing list