Replies: 2 comments
-
|
Ignored nodes holds only for the original transmitter, not the nodes in between. We can't reliable do this, because the So, even though the Fron* has Elr* on its ignore list, since the original transmitter is another node, it will accept it. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
tiptop, thank you, @GUVWAF closing the discussion |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hello, this is maybe a good question for @GUVWAF.
I am curious. I have a node named Fron*, Firmware 2.7.12, role Router_Late, where I have blocked / added to the is_ignored list,
a device role Router node named Elr*, which probably runs firmware 2.6.11.
On the node named Fron*, I have added Elr* to the ignore list:

However, when looking at traceroutes between my client_mute node and a distant other node, I see on the traceroute back to me that Elr* is suddenly on the traceroute list, in the step before Fron*.
How can that be given that Fron* has Elr* on its ignore list?
I am worrying a bit because there has recently been a new feature to update next-hop based on traceroute-result:
#8219
does that take into account nodes can be on the is_ignored list of a certain node along the way?
That would necessitate sort of a reverse-looking lookup, looking back, would it not? Like, is that node allowed to receive packets from the previous node ...
Sincerely
Sven / shalberd
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions