<div dir="ltr"><div>Dave: I love those Gource animations! Game development is my other hobby, I could easily get lost for weeks tweaking the shaders to make the glow "just right". :-)</div><div><br></div><div>Dan: Discovery would be nice, but I don't think we're ready to look in that direction yet. I'm trying to build a "common grammar" to make it easier to express network layout from integrations; that would be another form/layer of integration and a lot easier to work with once there's a solid foundation. Preseem does some of this (admittedly over-eagerly; nothing needs to query SNMP that often!), and the SNMP route is quite remarkably convoluted. Their support turned on a few "extra" modules to deal with things like PMP450 clients that change MAC when you put them in bridge mode vs NAT mode (and report the bridge mode CPE in some places either way), Elevate CPEs that almost but not quite make sense. Robert's code has the beginnings of some of this, scanning Mikrotik routers for IPv6 allocations by MAC (this is also the hardest part for me to test, since I don't have any v6 to test, currently).</div><div><br></div><div>We tend to use UISP as the "source of truth" and treat it like a database for a ton of external tools (mostly ones we've created).<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 7:27 PM dan <<a href="mailto:dandenson@gmail.com">dandenson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">we're pretty similar in that we've made UISP a mess. Multiple paths to a pop. multiple pops on the network. failover between pops. Lots of 'other' devices. handing out /29 etc to customers.<br><br>Some sort of discovery would be nice. Ideally though, pulling something from SNMP or router APIs etc to build the paths, but having a 'network elements' list with each of the links described. ie, backhaul 12 has MACs ..01 and ...02 at 300x100 and then build the topology around that from discovery. <br><br>I've also thought about doing routine trace routes or watching TTLs or something like that to get some indication that topology has changed and then do another discovery and potential tree rebuild. </div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 3:48 PM Robert Chacón via LibreQoS <<a href="mailto:libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>This is awesome! Way to go here. Thank you for contributing this.</div><div>Being able to map out these complex integrations will help ISPs a ton, and I really like that it is sharing common features between the Splynx and UISP integrations.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Robert<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 3:33 PM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS <<a href="mailto:libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>So I've been doing some work on getting UISP integration (and integrations in general) to work a bit more smoothly.</div><div><br></div><div>I started by implementing a graph structure that mirrors both the networks and sites system. It's not done yet, but the basics are coming together nicely. You can see my progress so far at: <a href="https://github.com/thebracket/LibreQoS/tree/integration-common-graph" target="_blank">https://github.com/thebracket/LibreQoS/tree/integration-common-graph</a></div><div><br></div><div>Our UISP instance is a <i>great</i> testcase for torturing the system. I even found a case of UISP somehow auto-generating a circular portion of the tree. We have:</div><div><ul><li>Non Ubiquiti devices as "other devices"</li><li>Sections that need shaping by subnet (e.g. "all of <a href="http://192.168.1.0/24" target="_blank">192.168.1.0/24</a> shared 100 mbit")</li><li>Bridge mode devices using Option 82 to always allocate the same IP, with a "service IP" entry</li><li>Various bits of infrastructure mapped</li><li>Sites that go to client sites, which go to other client sites</li></ul><div>In other words, over the years we've unleashed a bit of a monster. Cleaning it up is a useful talk, but I wanted the integration to be able to handle pathological cases like us!</div><div><br></div><div>So I fed our network into the current graph generator, and used graphviz to spit out a directed graph:</div><div><img src="cid:ii_l9rkwmjp0" alt="image.png" width="558" height="426"><br></div><div>That doesn't include client sites! Legend:</div><div><br></div><div><ul><li>Green = the root site.</li><li>Red = a site</li><li>Blue = an access point</li><li>Magenta = a client site that has children</li></ul><div>So the part in "common" is designed heavily to reduce repetition. When it's done, you should be able to feed in sites, APs, clients, devices, etc. in a pretty flexible manner. Given how much code is shared between the UISP and Splynx integration code, I'm pretty sure both will be cut to a tiny fraction of the total code. :-)</div><div><br></div><div>I can't post the full tree, it's full of client names.<br></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
LibreQoS mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Robert Chacón<br>CEO | <a href="http://jackrabbitwireless.com" target="_blank">JackRabbit Wireless LLC</a><br></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
LibreQoS mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank">LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>