Philipp Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > 2020-02-04 12:27:11,497 # ping6 fe80::1a:7dff:feda:7113
being paranoid, can you ping the link local from Openwrt?
> Yes, this is the RIOT side. Yes, ::2.
>> ifconfig 9 add 2aaa:8aaa:baaa:b700::2/64
> Which results in no response at all and the interface didn't change. It
> only has the link local address.
I don't know why it didn't change.
I know that if we could run RPL across the link, that it is better to just
have the LL. I ported unstrung (RPL daemon for Linux) to openwrt, and
we did interoperate once back in 2015 or something, but I don't have a
package for you today.
Can you assign a /128 to the loopback, and put a route to it on openwrt via
the LL address?
>> You can't bridge, because the L2 headers are very different.
>> You can route, using RPL, though, which is the recommended mechanism in
IPv6.
>> Going first hop to 6lowman as being BT has some interesting use cases, I
think.
> Yes, I thought it should be similar to the SLIP configuration, but with
> Bluetooth as interface. You should also be able to connect more than one
> node to the bt0 interface. So that you create a star topology at the
> router to many 6LoWPAN trees.
While BT can emulate serial connections, and you could run PPP over it,
that's not the IP over BT works. Even if it were SLIP, you still
couldn't bridge, because SLIP has *no* L2 headers :-)
WiFi/Ethernet bridging only works because WiFi look close enough that
they can be easily rewriten to be ethernet headers.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/users
