From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-23-ewr.dyndns.com (mxout-050-ewr.mailhop.org [216.146.33.50]) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E65B2E060A for ; Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scan-21-ewr.mailhop.org (scan-21-ewr.local [10.0.141.243]) by mail-23-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB3543343 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:59:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 () X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Originating-IP: 117.20.11.230 Received: from mail.cc.com.au (mail.cc.com.au [117.20.11.230]) by mail-23-ewr.dyndns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4594740202 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:59:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.cc.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id A981D3E02B for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:54:46 +1000 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.cc.com.au Received: from mail.cc.com.au ([117.20.11.230]) by localhost (mail.cc.com.au [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hmfZ2diRwSI6 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:54:46 +1000 (EST) Received: from [129.127.55.141] (web-test.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.55.141]) (Authenticated sender: kim@hawtin.net.au) by mail.cc.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0B10F3E030 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:54:46 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4DABC532.4090804@hawtin.net.au> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:29:30 +0930 From: Kim Hawtin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110307 Icedove/3.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <97EDD940-729E-4700-92B1-04DD7121CAB2@cc.gatech.edu> <4DAAFD3E.1050509@taht.net> <4DAB840F.3070903@hawtin.net.au> <4DAB97D6.7050503@taht.net> In-Reply-To: <4DAB97D6.7050503@taht.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bismark-devel] switching issue on device X-BeenThere: bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: BISMark related software development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 04:59:41 -0000 On 18/04/11 11:15, Dave Taht wrote: > In Nick's case he had AP isolation on, which isolates individual > wireless clients from each other on the same AP. > > Most cafe's and public wifi spots have this on. Home users and anyone > doing p2p stuff should have it off, and it should be off by default. > > It's ironic that people trust the internet more than machines > topologically close by these days. > > So if you have AP isolation on in your WPA case and off in your WEP > case, that's probably the real diagnosis. I will check this out when I get home. Its quite possible its the default on my AP. I need to image my older WRT54g with bismark and tinker with it directly. > I've *also* seen all kinds of issues with ARP of late, taking 10s of ms > for an ARP reply to be propagated, and in the bufferbloated case, often > failing entirely. Will have to compare with other kit locally to figure what happens with consumer kit... cheers, Kim