> BTW, how should VPN links be handled in this case? They are currently > marked as wired, but they can also experience packet loss. Does this > mean that bad VPN links can also cause huge amounts of control traffic?
It depends. How likely are they to lose two Hellos in a row? Babeld marks a wired link as down whenever it loses two out of three successive Hellos. If this only happens occasionally (loss probability is below 2% or so), then it's fine. If this happens often, then you should enable link quality estimation on them. In case of doubt, I suggest enabling link quality -- the really bad case is not having link quality estimation on lossy links, the opposite case (lq on lossless links) is inefficient but not too bad. If you want a quick fix, just change your firmware to run link quality everywhere (-w). If very lossy tunnels are a common occurrence in your network, I'll implement a metric specifically for them. But let's get your network running stably first. (Nexedi are using babeld over a lot of tunnels, but their tunnels are lossless, which is why we implemented RTT-based routing for them.) -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
