Hi All,
I was able to successfully get the MESH up & running on Nexus 4.
In Our project we used Linux kernel 3.4.0
But, MESH comes in wcn36xx driver (Linux kernel : 3.16)
So we need to back port from 3.16 to 3.4.0 Linux Kernel.
Below are the steps followed to get MESH up on Nexus4.
*Download the backport WCN36XX Wireless device driver from URL:-*
http://drvbp1.linux-foundation.org/~mcgrof/rel-html/backports/
select: backports-3.16-1
# mv /home/<user>Download/backport-3.16-1.tar.xz ./
# tar -xf ./backport-3.16-1.tar.xz
# cd backport-3.16-1
# make defconfig-wcn36xx
# make menuconfig
[*] Enable mac80211 mesh networking (pre-802.11s) support.
save & exit
# make KLIB=<kenrel directory path where zImage compiled>
KLIB_BUILD=<kerenl directory path where zImage compiled>
This will create compat.ko , cfg80211.ko , mac80211.ko and wcn36xx.ko.
# cd ..
*Download the wcn36xx_msm driver source code from URL: *
https://github.com/KrasnikovEugene/wcn36xx
click on Download ZIP (right side corner).
# mv wcn36xx-master.zip ./
# unzip wcn36xx-master.zip
# cd wcn36xx-master/wcn36xx_msm
# make KLIB=<kernel directory path where zImage compiled >
KLIB_BUILD=<kernel--directory path where zImage compiled >
This will create wcn36xx_msm.ko in current directory.
#cd ..
Hope this works for you.
Br,
Devaraj J
On Wednesday 01 October 2014 11:19 AM, Steger, Marco via Devel wrote:
Dear all,
first of all thank you for your input.
Tomorrow I'm back in my office and I will start to set up the 802.11s stuff for
my nexus 4 according to the steps stated by Bob and the information about
wcn36xx (thanks to Yeoh Chun-Yeow)
I will (try to) document all necessary steps to enable mesh on my Android
Smartphone. I will post the documentation here when I'm finished with it and
than we can discuss, if there is a good place to put it to help others with the
same issue.
Thanks again for your help and I hope that I can count on you if there are
further questions,
Marco
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Devel [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Ross
Wakelin via Devel
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 01. Oktober 2014 00:47
An: Javier Cardona
Cc: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh
Hi Javier
I can't comment for what is in or out of the standards.
Our biggest deployed mesh had 10 nodes, of which 4 were repeater only nodes.
Our kit consists of repeaters and endpoint nodes. Endpoint nodes have the
openwrt device connected to either a network video recorder and 4 cameras, or
a digital signage device, or a voip node with two sip extension phones. All the
nodes, including the repeater nodes, publish an SSID for staff access to all the
other devices, and internet access through a gateway node.
The way we have it, the nodes all have two IP addresses, one for the "internal"
mesh network so the devices can find and talk to each other and exchange
routing information, and a "behind"
network that contains all the supported devices. We use OLSR to publish and
share the behind networks over the mesh. The mesh runs on 5Ghz, and the
access network is 2.4Ghz.
All our devices are portable, and we can have the mesh up and running in less
than 10 minutes.
The biggest challenge is finding the best locations for the repeater nodes, and
we
have a process that runs on the openwrt device that checks the OLSR "goodness"
for each link, and then shows that as a colour/brightness/blink rate report on
an
RGB LED, so we can walk around with the repeater node turned on, looking for
the location that gives the best coverage AND connection back to the mesh.
Our repeaters have 20dBm omni aerials connected (three per node for N) and we
can normally get about 70-150Mbs link rate.
Hope this helps.
Ross
On 1 October 2014 11:24, Javier Cardona <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Ross,
Thanks for the info. May I ask how big a network can you support with
OLSR over 11s?
Early drafts of the 11s amendment supported OLSR in addition to HWMP.
But support for OLSR was dropped because "there are no additional deployment
scenarios or usage models that RA-OLSR enables beyond those that are enabled
by HWMP" [Source: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/07/11-07-2547-02-
000s-reconsidering-ra-olsr.ppt ]
I'm curious if that was an accurate statement or the proponents of that
motion were just in a hurry to get the standard ratified... :)
Cheers,
Javier
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Ross Wakelin
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hiya
In our mesh platform that is used to support emergency
responders, we use an underlying
11s layer, leveraging the authentication/encryption
capabilities,
and then use OLSR on top
to provide the routing and reporting/managing we need.
Sitting on top of 11n and Openwrt, it just works, and its
stable.
We use it to carry voice, video
and data across sites.
On 1 October 2014 05:42, Pau via Devel
<[email protected]> wrote:
Find my comments in line.
On 30/09/14 17:56, Javier Cardona wrote:
> Hi Pau,
>
> I agree with your assessment: 11s brings a number of
benefits over ad-hoc.
> In addition to the ones you listed, I would add:
>
> 6. symmetric security (SAE)
In AdHoc it is possible to use WPA2 PSK, however the
implementation of
SAE in 11s is probably better because of a cleaner
integration.
> 7. customizable path selection mechanism (which you
could use with your
> custom routing)
I suppose you mean the possibility of using a different
routing protocol
instead of HWMP such as OLSR (I've seen there is already
some
implementation on this). However in our case we are not
trying to
integrate 11s with bat-adv/bmx6 but just use 11s as
layer
1-2 and
bat-adv/bmx6 as layer 2.5/3.
> 8. power save
Yes, that is great, I've seen another post talking about
802.11s in
Android, that could bring us many possibilities too :)
> 9. interoperability: there are some incompatible ad-
hoc implementations
> out there as WFA did not test above 11 Mbps.
open80211s made vendor
> neutrality and interoperability a priority since day
one.
Right, we've experienced such incompatibilities and this
is actually one
of the points we are sick of Ad-Hoc.
> The only point that is debatable is 2: there aren't
that
many cards/drivers
> that support it.
We try to stick at Atheros drivers so here 11s seems to
have even better
support than Ad-Hoc.
> Best of luck,
>
Thank you for your comments Javier.
> Javier
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Pau via Devel
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>> I'm one of the developers of the libre-mesh project
[1]. Our aim is to
>> develop an OpenWRT based solution for quick and
easy building free/libre
>> mesh networks.
>>
>> Our network architecture is quite different from the
common ones, we are
>> mixing two routing protocols in layer2 and layer3
(batman-adv and bmx6).
>> You can find more information about it here [2].
>>
>> Until now we were using Ad-Hoc as link layer,
however recently we have
>> started to consider the idea of using 11s instead. We
are not interested
>> in the routing layer (HWMP) because we need some
features provided by
>> batman-adv, so we disable it by setting the option
mesh_forwarding to
>> false.
>>
>> I've already performed some tests and the results
look
quite good. Using
>> 11s instead of ad-hoc bring us some advantages which
are:
>>
>> 1. Better support for 11n
>> 2. Better compatibility with drivers
>> 3. You can bridge an 11s interface to another
interface if necessary
>> 4. It does NOT try to synchronize the TSF counter of
your wifi card
>> 5. You can create up to 8 11s VAP mixed with adhoc,
AP, client, etc...
>> 5. Get benefit of a newer protocol design
>>
>> I would like to know your opinion on this topic. None
of us now deeply
>> how 11s works, so we don't really know if what we
are trying to do is a
>> madness or a good idea. It would be also very
interesting for us to know
>> which options can we tun for getting better profit of
using 11s as link
>> layer.
>>
>> Thank you for your efforts on developing 11s.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> [1] https://dev.libre-mesh.org/projects/libre-mesh
>> [2]
>> https://dev.libre-mesh.org/projects/libre-
mesh/wiki/NetworkArchitecture
>> --
>> ./p4u
>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-
bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
--
./p4u
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-
bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
