Ok. I'll keep you updated. 2009/3/8 Tobias Heer <heer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Hi! > > Good to hear you solved your problem. Do you also get the weird error in > the trace with the second machine? If you find out what the error was, could > you please post a short description to the list? At least I would be very > interested in understanding the root of the problem. > > Thanks! > > Tobias > > > > Am 07.03.2009 um 13:32 schrieb Szabolcs Nováczki: > > Hi! >> >> Yesterday we could find a workaround for the problem. We simply used >> another machine for mobile node which had different wifi card. We could >> speed up handover but its still not clear what was the problem with the >> other one. >> Thanks for the help! >> >> >> Br, >> Szabi >> >> 2009/3/6 Tobias Heer <heer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: >> heer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> >> Hi. >> >> Am 06.03.2009 um 16:12 schrieb Szabolcs Nováczki: >> >> >> >> Not yet but sounds like a good idea, but how can you measure this. >> >> I once wrote a little test application that did nothing more than sending >> floods of UDP packets to a destination. We recorded the incoming UDP packets >> at the destination with tcpdump and analyzed the resulting race with >> wireshark later. The disruption shows in a number of missing packets (gap) >> in the trace. We also tried iperf for generating the flood of packets but it >> had problems when switching IP addresses and stopped sending when the >> handoff occured. I don't know if there is a smarter way to do it (there >> probably is) but we got quite convincing results with this method. >> >> I can send you the flooder program if you whish. >> >> >> Could you have a look at the trace? >> >> Could you send me the trace once again (on private - maybe as zip or tar). >> Somehow I did not get the attachment. >> >> >> The 2.13GHz Pentium with 2G RAM laptop we use as mobile should be fast >> enough, I guess. >> >> >> Sure. Crypto should only be a minor factor then. >> >> BR, Tobias >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I hope this provides some insights into the problem. >> >> BR, >> >> Tobias >> >> >> >> Am 06.03.2009 um 14:03 schrieb Szabolcs Nováczki: >> >> Hi! >> >> Yes, I did not get your message on the list. Wonder why... >> >> Anyway. Here is the answer: >> >> See my answers inline! >> >> ################# >> Hi, >> >> I will try do give some assistance but I need a bit more information about >> the problem. >> a) Could you provide some numbers in ms or s? What means significant? I >> was >> not able to read your attachment and it probably lacks timing information >> anyway. >> Sorry i forgot to give this info :). The delay is about 2 secs. I attached >> the file again but you have right: there is no timing. >> >> b) Could you also give some detail about the machines you are working with >> (CPU speed) ... >> Ill send this later cause i am not sure of the detailes. >> >> c) ... and the test setup you are using (directly connected vs. sited at >> different sites). >> All is IPv6. There are three different /64 networks. One for the cn and >> two >> for the mobile. The cn is attached on wire. The mobile is attched to one >> of >> the latter two sites through wireless acces points and uses IPv6 >> stateless >> autoconfiguration when receiving router advertisements to configure its IP >> address. We use a script which periodically changes (iwconfig new_ap) from >> one ap to the other and back. The mobile reconfigures its ip address which >> triggers the hip update mechanism. >> >> d) Do you move between different (wireless?) networks? >> see answer for c.) >> >> e) Are you using the same IP address in these different networks? >> We use different addresses: >> 2001:0738:2001:2084:0213:ceff:fe7b:fd28 >> 2001:0738:2001:2088:0213:ceff:fe7b:fd28 >> >> BR, >> >> Tobias >> >> ############## >> >> Br, >> Szabi >> >> 2009/3/6 Tobias Heer <tobias.heer@xxxxxx<mailto:tobias.heer@xxxxxx>> >> >> Just in case you missed the message on the list... >> >> >> Anfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail: >> >> Von: Tobias Heer <heer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:heer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> >> Datum: 6. März 2009 09:59:05 MEZ >> An: "hipl-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:hipl-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>" < >> hipl-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:hipl-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> >> Kopie: Goodzi <goodzi@xxxxxx<mailto:goodzi@xxxxxx>> >> >> Betreff: Re: [hipl-users] long delay in mobility handling procedure >> >> Hi, >> >> I will try do give some assistance but I need a bit more information >> about >> the problem. >> a) Could you provide some numbers in ms or s? What means significant? I >> was not able to read your attachment and it probably lacks timing >> information anyway. >> >> b) Could you also give some detail about the machines you are working >> with >> (CPU speed) ... >> >> c) ... and the test setup you are using (directly connected vs. sited at >> different sites). >> >> d) Do you move between different (wireless?) networks? >> >> e) Are you using the same IP address in these different networks? >> >> BR, >> >> Tobias >> >> Am 06.03.2009 um 09:11 schrieb Szabolcs Nováczki: >> >> Hi hipl users! >> >> >> We are doing some tests with infraHIP recently. With basic mobility >> tests >> we run into the following behaviour: >> >> There is a significant delay in infraHIP (on the mobile side) before >> sending out the first update package. >> >> I attached a commented trace of the hipd output (hipd_trace_medium) >> where >> I highlighted the suspected part. >> >> My request is that if some of you has time to analyze this or someone >> knows the reason for this behaviour please share with us! What happenes >> there? Is this delay ok? We are also interested of mechanisms >> triggering >> the update procedure in hipd, and how this trigger is processed. >> >> Thx! >> >> Br, >> Szabolcs Novaczki >> >> Ps.: hipd is running on 2.6.27-11 generic kernel installed from ubuntu >> interpid package >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student >> Distributed Systems Group >> RWTH Aachen University, Germany >> tel: +49 241 80 207 76 >> web: http://ds.cs.rwth-aachen.de/members/heer >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> <hipd_trace_medium.txt> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student >> Distributed Systems Group >> RWTH Aachen University, Germany >> tel: +49 241 80 207 76 >> web: http://ds.cs.rwth-aachen.de/members/heer >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student >> Distributed Systems Group >> RWTH Aachen University, Germany >> tel: +49 241 80 207 76 >> web: http://ds.cs.rwth-aachen.de/members/heer >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Dipl.-Inform. Tobias Heer, Ph.D. Student > Distributed Systems Group > RWTH Aachen University, Germany > tel: +49 241 80 207 76 > web: http://ds.cs.rwth-aachen.de/members/heer > > > > > > > > >