Hi Marco, You are suppose to execute combat.ko before wcn36xx_msm.ko,
MESH support needs to be tested from executing "#iw list" command which lists "Supported interface modes: *mesh point" along with other modes. Create a MESH POINT :- Create at-least two mesh points to establish communication. General steps for creating MESH NODES to establish "Peer to Peer" Communication between two wireless entities :- 1. On any Linux machine please, enter in Super User (#SU) mode. 2. #killall wpa_supplicant 3. #iw dev <wlanX> set type mp 4. #iw dev <wlanX> set meshid <XXXXXX> 5. #iw dev <wlanX> set channel <Number> 6. #ifconfig <wlanX> xx.xx.xx.xx up Once after executing the above steps, 2 entities must communicate with each other & the same can be verified by executing # ping xx.xx.xx.xx [from both the entities] Best regards, Devaraj J > Hi Devaraj! > > I had some trouble getting my 64bit Linux machine running. Thatâs why it > takes some time to start with your guide to get Mesh working on my > Nexus4. > > First of all thanks for that great guide. Everything worked fine and now I > have the 5 .ko files on my Nexus and I was also able to run the new kernel > on my device. > > Then I tried to load the files using insmod. "insmod wcn36xx_msm.ko" seems > to work fine but for the other files I got " insmod: init_module > 'wcn36xx.ko' failed (No such file or directory)" or " insmod: can't open > 'combat.co' " errors. Do you have an idea what could wrong here? > > Can you also give me a hint what to do next when the insmod finally works? > How to connect to the mesh network? > > I hope you can help me once again!!! > > Thanks in advance and kind regards, > Marco > > > >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>Von: Devaraj J [mailto:[email protected]] >>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 01. Oktober 2014 14:16 >>An: Steger, Marco; [email protected] >>Betreff: Re: AW: 802.11s as link layer in libre-mesh >> >>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]> >><mailto:[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]> <mailto:[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]> >><mailto:[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]> >><mailto:[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
