Re: [dtn-users] Unavailable opportunistic links
"Zoller, David A. (MSFC-EO50)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT]" <david.a.zoller@nasa.gov> Wed, 15 January 2014 15:31 UTC
Return-Path: <david.a.zoller@nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: dtn-users@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-users@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com
(Postfix) with ESMTP id A27851AE3A8 for <dtn-users@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:31:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.262
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.262 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9wPByKeNA3er for
<dtn-users@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:31:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov
[IPv6:2001:4d0:a302:1100::101]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id
B4A8B1AE397 for <dtn-users@irtf.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:31:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ndmsppt103.ndc.nasa.gov (ndmsppt103.ndc.nasa.gov
[198.117.0.68]) by ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 270CAD0445;
Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:31:17 -0600 (CST)
Received: from NDMSCHT109.ndc.nasa.gov (ndmscht109-pub.ndc.nasa.gov
[198.117.0.209]) by ndmsppt103.ndc.nasa.gov (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id
s0FFV2Pa030059; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:31:02 -0600
Received: from NDMSMBX404.ndc.nasa.gov ([169.254.4.13]) by
NDMSCHT109.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.0.209]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001;
Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:31:02 -0600
From: "Zoller,
David A. (MSFC-EO50)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT]" <david.a.zoller@nasa.gov>
To: "Mehta, Devanshu - 0665 - MITLL" <mehta@ll.mit.edu>,
"dtn-users@irtf.org" <dtn-users@irtf.org>
Thread-Topic: Unavailable opportunistic links
Thread-Index: Ac8QpoTe2QjMM4k4Q/mOXf7Ahv0SFgBXhR1w
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:31:01 +0000
Message-ID: <94CFB3711B4CAE4DBFC5BEB3374BF0C60670CA@NDMSMBX404.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <CEF9C4DD.10AA2%mehta@ll.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CEF9C4DD.10AA2%mehta@ll.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [198.119.225.34]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_000_94CFB3711B4CAE4DBFC5BEB3374BF0C60670CANDMSMBX404ndcnasa_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87, 1.0.14,
0.0.0000 definitions=2014-01-15_05:2014-01-15, 2014-01-15,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
Subject: Re: [dtn-users] Unavailable opportunistic links
X-BeenThere: dtn-users@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Users."
<dtn-users.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/dtn-users>,
<mailto:dtn-users-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn-users/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-users@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-users-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-users>,
<mailto:dtn-users-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:31:17 -0000
Hi Devanshu, I have not experimented with the opportunistic links enough to give you a definitive answer but the when an alwayson link drops it tries to reconnect every now and then based on the parameters link_min_retry_interval and link_max_retry_interval. I suspect that opportunistic works the same way but it will not try to reconnect unless it has bundles pending for the destination. Hope this helps a bit, DZ From: dtn-users [mailto:dtn-users-bounces@irtf.org] On Behalf Of Mehta, Devanshu - 0665 - MITLL Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 3:29 PM To: dtn-users@irtf.org Subject: [dtn-users] Unavailable opportunistic links Folks, If I have a simple two-node network using an OPPORTUNISTIC (TCP) link that becomes UNAVAILABLE because the nodes are out of range for >30 seconds, what is the appropriate automated method for setting this link back to AVAILABLE when they are back in range? By "appropriate", I mean consistent with the DTN architecture and the rest of dtn 2.9.0. (My actual network is not this simple, but the above illustration gets to the heart of what I want to get done) Thanks, -- Devanshu Mehta Airborne Networks MIT Lincoln Laboratory
- [dtn-users] Unavailable opportunistic links Mehta, Devanshu - 0665 - MITLL
- Re: [dtn-users] Unavailable opportunistic links Zoller, David A. (MSFC-EO50)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT]