In my particular case, correct route propagation is a problem on IPV6 (im not running babel) and I have only 2 wifi clients... Bridging has never shown any perf issues in the past so I 'd like to switch back to this simpler setup. I can picture that this might not fit the bill for more intensive use cases.I am familiar with that command :) Was wondering if there was something I could do when I cannot ssh into the router. As mentioned above, when trying to configure the bridge I hit a point where I could nt get in the router anymore.I understand the design decisions of the project and far from me the idea of challenging them :) I was simply trying to provide an alternative config with a standard bridge ethernet + wifi for reference. I believe that in the case mentioned by Sebastian (multiple, mobile, devices accessing resources across segments) bridging is a simple way forward.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Fred Stratton <fredstratton@imap.cc> wrote:
So much for memory
mtd -r erase rootfs_data
is the correct invocation.
On 24/02/14 10:18, Fred Stratton wrote:
I suggest you read the cero wiki. This details the original design decisions. On the router,
ssh in, and use
mtd -r erase fs_data
to recover to defaults. See
http://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/techref/mtd
If you ever have used BB daily builds, you can type this in your sleep.
On 24/02/14 10:05, Vincent Frentzel wrote:
I could be totally out for lunch here, but shouldn't that be se00 (secure ethernet) instead of eth0.1? At least on 3.10.28-14 neuter "ifconfig" nor /etc/config/network mentions eth0.1 at all. Could you post both of these (so the result of calling ifconfig on a terminal on the router and the content of /etc/config/network ;), I am sure you know what I meant, just dying to be verbose for the sake of people stumbling over the archive of the mailing list)
Hi Sebastian,
Understood. I will come back to you with the ifconfig.
For info, I did try both se00 and eth0.1. The reason I stuck with eth0.1 was that barrier breaker usually uses eth0.1 for br-lan with vlan enabled (eth0.1 appears in Luci in cerowrt). So in cero I just reenabled the vlan and used a type "bridge" on the network section (I renamed this section se99 instead of se00).
I then added se99 it to the "lan" zone of the firewall. In the wireless config I specified network as "se99" instead of sw10 and sw00. I confirmed that the setup was correct in the web interface where eth0.1 sw00 and sw10 appeared under the new bridged interface ( there was the nice icon with the iface in brackets).
I went on to modify the dhcp config of se00 and changed se00 occurences for se99 and commented out entries for sw10/sw00. --> this would give me dhcp running on my new bridge.
After a dnsmasq restart dnsmasq.conf shows the dhcp ranges line with interface se99. (I was expecting to see br-se99 but maybe that file is alias aware, could be wrong here).
After a network restart I lost connectivity on cable. Wireless was working.
I played a tad more and eventually lost wifi as well and had to reflash the router via tftp/factory image (maybe there is a reset trick you could give me to avoid this step).
Are you running cerowrt in bridge mode? If yes could you share your network/firewall/dhcp config? Is there another file I should have edited and missed?
Cheers,
V
_______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
_______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel