Error
  • Request Forbidden
 Broadband-Hamnet™ Forum :: Developer's Forum
Welcome Guest   [Register]  [Login]
 Subject :re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 05:33:10 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 


Good afternoon to all.

I have a mock up using a Nano Bridge M2 , Nano Bridge M5 and a Cisco 2950 switch.

The switch port in use are configured for vlan 2. The M5 DHCP has been disabled . This will allow the M2 to serve all DHCP addresses.

Problem :: Neither radio can see the other. no traffic is flowing between the radios

with a static address on the laptop I can connect to the M5 I don't see the M2 when I look at OLSR

dhcp on the M2 I connect and I don't see M5 in OLSR

Wireshark only shows the individual M2 & M5 . No coms between the two units . This is odd, what I have seen on previous captures of neighbor relations between nodes. 




IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 05:46:23 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

The switch port needs to be configured as a dot1q TRUNK port on Cisco.

Vlan 2 is a trunked vlan.

You could use vlan 10 and 20 for each node  so you don't have to disable dhcp/etc if you want as well as the native vlan but that's optional.

See: http://www.broadband-hamnet.org/hsmm-mesh-forums/view-postlist/forum-910/topic-910-managed-switch-configuration.html as an example.

Webmaster: please recategorize to one of the other forums (problems and answers perhaps) for tracking as this is not firmware development related.

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 07:32:04 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 
Interesting how when I tested this weekend with 1.1.2 I only had to have the switch in Vlan2 No trunking was required. That was with three M5 radios on the switch and a laptop on the 4th port monitoring the other three ports traffic. Now we move to 3.0 and you slam me for finding something that doesn't work. Your instructions are so out dated in code that several of your commands don't exist. Yes I work with Cisco equipment day in and day out. Try to make sure your documents are up to date before you tell some one to use them. Another note. when I did a search of the site for dtdlink before posting my message Your page never came up !
IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 07:52:38 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

Not ment to be a slam just asking the webmaster to tag it for us.

The site search doesn't search the forum so that limits the ability.  I only could find it because I knew for see it existed and used google search. It's one item that the webmaster should be fixing in a future site upgrade.

Not sure why it would of worked on 1.1.2 vs 3.0.0 as we made no changes to Ubiquiti on dtdlink (we did disable it on Linksys )   It's always been a dot1q tagged vlan port. 

And the guide I sent is just an example, I haven't owned a new cisco switch in a while I've been using different gear because of work.

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 08:40:46 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 
Conrad, I did follow your document ( Minus the old commands ) that you sent me the link too, thank you. Some one should fix the search feature and it would probably cut down on useless messages. The M5 still doesn't see the M2. I backup to 1.1.2 and its working again.
IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 09:09:20 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

Just to verify all devices are running 3.0.0b02 correct  when testing the 3.0 dtdlink right ?

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 09:36:14 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 
They were running 3.0b2 code when I was testing. Now they are working running 1.1.2
IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 10:45:54 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

What happens if you plug them in directly to each other bypassing the switch?

Nothing changed between 1.1.2 and 3.0.0* on the Ubiquiti side for DTDLINK (though the upper level protocol did change) 

The fact it worked on 1.1.2 without configuration is a mystery to me unless Cisco has added some auto route vlan feature since I was last around.

You should be able to verify this with a wireshark directly to the node seeing a dot1q tagged vlan which the switch should honor and then flood out the rest of the ports (as a dot1q tagged vlan -- hence the need for trunk mode). If it doesn't have the tag then something is wrong or if the switch strips the tag the nodes won't be able to see the packet.

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 14:14:38 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 

Let me clarify one thing. I set the vlan on the switch ports used by the UBNT devices to access mode and to vlan 2. no trunk mode. Without anything coming up in search engine on the page I knew from earlier research that the dtdlink was vlan2. So that's all I setup.


I didn't see a need for any other vlans, let alone a trunk. Hind site all my wireless AP's at work are all on trunk ports. Last weekend I was testing 1.1.2 and 3.0.0 and then I was testing 3.0.0b2 .The idea was to simulate a three sector tower setup. I had a total of Five M5's. Three to form the ring ( three 120 degree sectors ) and two out on perimeters to act as clients. I set the switch ports to access mode on vlan 2 and I could see the traffic and pass traffic between the nodes on what I'm designating RING 0.


Then earlier this week with an M2 running 1.1.2 and it worked. I upgraded the M2 to the 3.0.0 The same switch config but only a single M5 and the M2. no go it was all broke. upgraded to 3.0.0b2 and same scenario. I went over everything that I did, notes, drawings, configs. I had been monitoring with Wireshark the whole time this was taking place.


Earlier in the week I saw the traffic Now since i went back to my original three M5's as ring 0 and running 1.1.2 its all working again. ?????? Step 2 . This evening. I upgraded back to 3.0.0b2 on all nodes with just VLAN2 and it didn't work. This proved something had changed. Step 3 . I set all UBNT device ports to trunk mode with vlan 10 native allowing 1,2,& 10 on the trunk. Everything is working. I can pass traffic both to and from 2.4 & 5.8 and from one band to the other. The confusion only came in when I simplified my setup and used a single M5 & M2. I could see the DTDLink traffic with the three M5 on the original testing last weekend. Its all working now. Thank you


=========


Switch configuration


This configuration was done for a three sector array with two backbone nodes setup to pass traffic from This site to the next.


This assumed you have a console cable connected to a computer and that there is no configuration on the switch. The switch has had a Factory reset preformed. All commands were done on a Cisco 2950 switch running 12.3 code. This may or may not work with other versions of code.

  1. First we setup the VLANs and second the ports that need these vlan's
  2.  Cisco 2950 running 12.3 code connect using a console cable. 8N1 / 9600

  3. #Setup the vlan database:
  4. switch>enable
  5. switch#
  6. switch#config t
  7. switch(config)#
  8. switch(config)#vlan 10
  9. switch(config-vlan)#name BBHN
  10. switch(config-vlan)#no shutdown
  11. switch(config-vlan)#exit
  12. switch(config)#vlan 2
  13. switch(config-vlan)#name DTDLINK
  14. switch(config-vlan)#no shutdown
  15. switch(config-vlan)#exit
  16. switch(config)#exit

  17. switch# show vlan
  18.  VLAN   NAME  STATUS
  19.      1 default    active
  20.      2 DTDLINK active
  21.    10 BBHN      active

  22. switch# config t
  23. switch(config)#interface range Fa0/1 - 3 << Program up all three ports at once
  24. switch(config-if-range)#Description BBHN Sector Array XX
  25. switch(config-if-range)#switchport mode trunk
  26. switch(config-if-range)#switchport trunk allowed vlan 2,10
  27. switch(config-if-range)#switchport trunk native vlan 10
  28. switch(config-if-range)#speed 100
  29. switch(config-if-range)#duplex full
  30. switch(config-if-range)#no shutdown
  31. switch(config-if-range)#exit

  32. switch(config)#interface range Fa0/4 - 5 << Program up two backbone link ports at once
  33. switch(config-if-range)#Description Link to site XX
  34. switch(config-if-range)#switchport mode trunk
  35. switch(config-if-range)#switchport trunk allowed vlan 2,10
  36. switch(config-if-range)#switchport trunk native vlan 10
  37. switch(config-if-range)#speed 100
  38. switch(config-if-range)#duplex full
  39. switch(config-if-range)#no shutdown
  40. switch(config-if-range)#exit
  41. switch(config)# interface fa0/6
  42. switch(config-if)#Description TestPortUseOnly 
  43. switch(config-if)#switchport mode access
  44. switch(config-if)#switchport access vlan 10
  45. switch(config-if)#switchport speed 100
  46. switch(config-if)#switchport duplex full
  47. switch(config-if)#switchport spanning-tree portfast
  48. switch(config-if)#no shutdown
  49. switch(config-if)#exit
  50. switch(config)#exit

  51. switch# copy run start << Copy the running configuration to the startup configuration

  52. switch#show interface trunk

  53. Port Mode encapsulation Status Native Vlan
  54. Fa0/1 on 802.1q Trunking 10
  55. Fa0/2 on 802.1q Trunking 10
  56. Fa0/3 on 802.1q Trunking 10
  57. Fa0/4 on 802.1q Trunking 10
  58. Fa0/5 on 802.1q Trunking 10
  59. Port Vlans Allowed
  60. Fa0/1 2,10
  61. Fa0/2 2,10
  62. Fa0/3 2,10
  63. Fa0/4 2,10
  64. Fa0/5 2,10
IP Logged
Last Edited On: 2014-11-07- 14:30:14 By AE4ML for the Reason
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-07- 14:49:10 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

Glad it is working when in trunk mode.

Jist a note for anyone else who may come across the config in the future:

The hard coding of the speed and duplex is not handled in our default BBHN builds.  While this config may work for a LAN a potential for collisions is possible as the network card aboard the Ubiquiti should fall back to 10mbps/half duplex.

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-08- 03:58:08 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 
Any proffessional network Engineer would say different with a very rare acception. I do mean Rare ! Unless you are supporting out dated 1980 - 1990 equipment. 90% of all devices on the market are 100 - 1000 - 10000 /full. finding anything that is less than 100 is rare and is becoming phased out. Failling to lock these devices at the higher speed and duplexwill only cause error and collisions on a network. This included the wired side of an access point. If you are rewriting the code not to support 100 full then well there you are and something else. I wont touch on that.
IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-08- 04:34:25 
AE4ML
Member
Joined: 2014-06-01- 15:17:42
Posts: 47
Location: Spotsylvania VA USA
 
I just came across this interesting post from you conrad. NO Managed switch is needed for DTDLINK ? Your own words. Which is what I originally did and you pointed me to the other page. WHats wrong here ?? Subject :Re:combining 5ghz with 2.4ghz.. 2014-07-14- 05:12:43 KG6JEI Hacker Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05 Posts: 329 Location: 14 Hello Michael, I'm not sure you correctly understand how the devices already function for your plans. The processes described in Michaels post is more likely if you were to use the WAN uplink (meshgw) and not dtdlink traffic. DTDLINK is intended for when you want to combine multiple mesh devices together (you would generaly not filter here for internet as this is a mesh to mesh connection) such as using a 5.8 backbone throughout an area and feeding to local 2.4ghz access layer, or multiple devices at a site like when you having 3 120degree sector units at the same site on the same band and need to combine them (creating a digital omni) No managed switch is needed for DTDLINK In all cases: Local PC generated Broadcasts are already filtered at the mesh node because of how the nodes work. In addition RF broadcasts are not propagated past the first node either. The only broadcast you would have (by default) on the dtdlink interface is the OLSR packets which you do want to go across untouched for the network to expand across multiple devices. IP Logged Conrad Lara KG6JEI Note: Most posts submitted from iphone
IP Logged
Michael Lussier
AE4ML
 Subject :Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-08- 04:53:06 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location

I was pointing out that we do not have a setting in the BBHN GUI for changing the network port speed settings to lock them down, instead we stick with letting the device choose under Ethernet autonegotiation protocol (often cited as addendum 802.3u but now bundled into the official 802.3 spec's)

When you hard code the speed on a device it (usually) disables autonegotiation of speed and duplex on that link

Cisco confirms this is the case:

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/ethernet/10561-3.html

"If you want to hard code the speed and duplex on a switch that runs Cisco IOS Software (turn off auto-negotiation), issue the speed and duplex commands underneath the specific interface. Duplex is subservient to speed in the sense that if speed is set to auto, then the duplex cannot be manually set."

The Usual fallback I've seen in the 10/100 world was 10/Half (though I've sen some smart drivers upgrade the link to 100/half if they see 100mbhs traffic)

When you get into gigabit it gets even stricter it seems (quoting same article)

"By default, all devices are supposed to perform autonegotiation. 802.3z does not specifically define a way to turn Autonegotiation off, for both 1GigabitEthernet and 10GigabitEthernet."

You could hard program the speed into the back-end of the BBHN device  and the operating system will honor it,  its just we don't expose a hard interface config setting via the GUI (at this time).

Same Article:

"Cisco recommends to leave auto-negotiation on for those devices compliant with 802.3u."

Though despite that recommendation , like you, I have had portions of my network where I have hard coded link data. Though I have also have portions where I have hard coded, and it actually mucks things up (I had a buggy version of VMWARE ESX at one time that had issues where the interfaces woudl periodically reset itself to half duplex unless you left autonegotiation in place as one example)

So yes we will fully support 100mbps on 100mbps devices, its just we tend to let autonegotiation set the link speed rather then exposing a GUI setting where mistakes can be made.

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
 Subject :Re:Re:re 3.0.0b02 DTDLINK no user traffic across the bridge.. 2014-11-08- 05:04:33 
KG6JEI
Member
Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05
Posts: 516
Location


Correct, when you use an unmanaged switch (a 'dumb' switch) they will generally (i won't say always, but I have never seen one yet that doesn't) forward the entire Ethernet frame through the switch.

802.1q vlan tagging is done inside the data portion of the frame. An unmanaged switch only cares about the Source and Destination MAC address (some don't even verify the packet is not corrupt while others do but that is just a CRC check.)  Knowing the source and destination an unmanaged switch can forward the packet out the correct interface (in the case of an OLSRD packet it should be broadcast to all ports as a broadcast frame)

A easy image of this is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.1Q#mediaviewer/File:Ethernet_802.1Q_Insert.svg

A smart/managed switch on the other hand actually looks into the frames (to one degree or another) and performs additional actions.   Layer 3 managed switches will go all the way up to IP address parts of the frame while others will only act on Layer 2. Cisco has both these options available.

A managed switch can go "the extra mile" of setting and checking policies.  In the case of a Cisco switch if the interface is not tagged as a trunk port it will STRIP the trunk data off (this acts as a method to prevent an end user from feeding 802.1q up the interface and bypassing your routing/firewall systems) to ensure the data transiting the port meets the ports policy setup.

So if you use an unmanaged switch you end up in a situation where the tagged frames can pass as the switch knows nothing about it, when you use a smart switch you end up in a situation where it 'violates policy' to let the frame pass unless the switch has been specifically configured to permit it. 

I'm sure some managed switch out there is more permissive in that regard, but I haven't had one in my hands yet.






[AE4ML 2014-11-08- 04:34:25]:

I just came across this interesting post from you conrad. NO Managed switch is needed for DTDLINK ? Your own words. Which is what I originally did and you pointed me to the other page. WHats wrong here ?? Subject :Re:combining 5ghz with 2.4ghz.. 2014-07-14- 05:12:43 KG6JEI Hacker Joined: 2013-12-02- 19:52:05 Posts: 329 Location: 14 Hello Michael, I'm not sure you correctly understand how the devices already function for your plans. The processes described in Michaels post is more likely if you were to use the WAN uplink (meshgw) and not dtdlink traffic. DTDLINK is intended for when you want to combine multiple mesh devices together (you would generaly not filter here for internet as this is a mesh to mesh connection) such as using a 5.8 backbone throughout an area and feeding to local 2.4ghz access layer, or multiple devices at a site like when you having 3 120degree sector units at the same site on the same band and need to combine them (creating a digital omni) No managed switch is needed for DTDLINK In all cases: Local PC generated Broadcasts are already filtered at the mesh node because of how the nodes work. In addition RF broadcasts are not propagated past the first node either. The only broadcast you would have (by default) on the dtdlink interface is the OLSR packets which you do want to go across untouched for the network to expand across multiple devices. IP Logged Conrad Lara KG6JEI Note: Most posts submitted from iphone

IP Logged
Note: Most posts submitted from iPhone
Page # 


Powered by ccBoard


SPONSORED AD: