Not sure about your first question, but NAT and DHCP are two different animals. You won't be able to exceed the number of DHCP leases you've set in the config, 1, 5 or 13 regardless of NATting.

That setting is on a per-node basis. I use 13 DIRECT as a default on all my nodes. I use a wifi router connected to one of the node ports, giving me 8 WIFI adresses available for devices. I found out the hard way that leaving it at 5 DIRECT only gives me one assignable address via DHCP. In order to give wifi clients direct access to the mesh, you need to set the wifi router to pass through DHCP requests, so the node manages addressing. This is done automatically if you use a BBHN node in AP mode, or DD-WRT is pretty easy to set up for this type of operation.

Using a connected wifi router with it's own DHCP active, and connecting that to a node, does open up the wifi to use as many addresses as you have enabled in the wifi router. That creates a pretty complicated setup that seriously messes up the whole mesh idea, and usually does require NAT. I tried it, didn't like it, and don't do it anymore. Someone with lots of network savvy would probably say I'm a chicken, but I really like the simplicity and rapid setup of direct mode.

A disadvantage I've found when mixing direct and nat modes is that the name services seem to go a bit wonky. When everyone is in direct mode, it's a simple matter to manipulate the advertised services so that computers and devices can join the mesh and quickly find services by name; 'ftp_server', 'pbx', etc. A node in nat mode seems to have a problem resolving names, making advertised services harder to set up. Might just be my attempts at setup, but that's been my experience. 

Has anyone set up FileZilla (FTP Server and Client) to work with the Ham Mesh net?

If so, could you contact me at "ke6wez@gmail.com".

I have tried, but just haven't been able to get it working over the Ham Mesh Nodes.

Thanks.

Sorry missing part of URL.

http://broadband-hamnet.org/download/kamikaze/7.09/brcm-2.4/packages/

Is there any disadvantage or advantage  in using NAT mode on one router and 13 Host Direct on another router ??

Another question is  13 Host Direct mean only 13 Hosts on that one router  or..?? Can anyone explain ??

Thank you

LJJ

Received VM (went to a number I don't normally access but can get to me with time)

Bit late to be calling though.

Let me know via @amsat some good times for you and I will give you a call.  There are a couple options depending how flexible you want it to be and how exactly your network protocol passing is worked out and varying scenarios if complexity to setup.

Currently at for Linksys 

http://broadband-hamnet.org/download/kamikaze/7.09/packages/mipsel

And
http://broadband-hamnet.org/download/kamikaze/7.09/brcm-2.4/

You need to enable "mesh gateway" on the node that is plugged into an active internet connection before the other nodes can communicate with an NTP server.

According to the descriptions, when a node is connected to the Internet it will automatically get its time from an NTP server (default is us.pool.ntp.org).  Will this NTP access propagate to other nodes on the mesh?  Mine don't seem to be syncing their time to an NTP server on the WAN so I wanted to understand a bit more about how this NTP sync should work, and maybe I could figure out why mine aren't.

Where, EXACTLY, are packages which are loadable into  v1.1.2 on WRT54GL routers?

I have been trying to load the "joe" editor from the OpenWRT site. (I can use vi, but don't like it.) I have downloaded various versions of it to my PC.  When I try to Upload from the Administration page  I am told "nothing to do",  "error 4",  and "can't find joe".  However, the Browse window allows me to find the file, and its name is displayed.

Could someone do a screendump of the Services/ports  page with a *working* installation of a service.  I have activated the Windows NTP server (w32tm) in  Windows 8.1, but I can't get HSMM to recognise its presence.

73,  Graham Lees ZL3GSL

So first off,  the reason for the NAT is rather obvious but I will state it for those whom may not know, we are converting from a private 10.0.0.0/8 range to whatever is on the subnet and were a singe device and the 10.0.0.0/8 is it's own ecosystem with lots of standards around it.

Can you please advise what you are trying to do? Having an idea of what you think you want to do might be more useful as there is more going on in the mesh interfaces with all the standardized protocols and configurations that come into play. Some features may or may not work depending upon what your looking at without modification etc.

Just turning NAT off on it's own wouldn't solve all the issues your likely to hit,  you may get the source address but now we have a lot more issues,  like how are nodes on one mesh going to know about nodes on another? How are you going to configure the router to know which network nodes are on? How will the router handle having a 10.0.0.0/8 network on each interface ? What if a user moves between the two networks?  

I can not change the 5.8GHz system to the MESH technology as the 5.8 is being used by several other volunteer groups.  This is why I wanted to find a way of bridging into my existing system.

If you have the time I would like to speak with you on the phone.  I have left my number on your machine.

Respectfully

Paul Strauss

WD6EBY

Camarillo California

If you use supported devices for your backbone you can do this already.

DtDlinkd 2 devices together. If you use DtDlink on a 2.4ghz node to a 5.8ghz node and then mesh out over the. 5.8 (even if it's a PtP link)  the mesh protocol extends across and now the 2 independent meshes are one big mesh like you want.

Over wifi it used a less strict requierment It's just the vlan 2  protocol that is only meant for low/no loss links.

OK I understand what you are saying.  I did have a related question pertaining to the LAN Host Addressing.  If I were given control over this address scheme, I beleive that I could bridge (dtdlinking)  together many MESH units Lan.  I have done some sudo successful address manipulation have been able to connect via a dtdlink path.  I believe that this scheme is workable.

This is no more that what already existed on the stock Linksys or Ubiquity router port being able to set the address that I choose.   

So in essence, ability to control the entire Lan Host addressing limited to say 13 addresses.

With this I believe I could truly bridge these devices together.

I do not have the knowledge to SSH into the unit and make the changes I have suggested, so I am turning to you.

If needed, please contact me so we can discuss this further.

Respectfully,

Paul Strauss

WD6EBY

All,

Firstly, a big thank you to all for your efforts. I'm having a ball!

I have been doing some work here in my own lab using some Cisco routing equipment (3700 with 36 port switch module).

What I am trying to do si stand up two or more mesh networks using a different SSID for each network. I then want to use the router to route traffic between them.

I see this as having some practical use here and also a great way to learn something new, not to mention I have a friend who is a Cisco trained engineer who has gotten interested.

The problem we are having is the NAT that goes on between the LAN and WAN. It's messing with our attempts to create the routes we want. Come to think of it, the NATing plays hob with Asterisk too. Trust me, double NATing is pretty ugly.

I'd like your thoughts on this.  I'd kind of like to be able to selectively turn off NATing if possible.

Again, thanks!

Chuck...

WB6YOK

Unlikely,

1) Keep in mind in the US Part 15 users are secondary to any and all licensed users of the 2.4ghz band  This means the hardware has already been designed to handle use in environments where it may not have control of the band

2) For 21 miles you likely will be using high gain dish antennas,  this means the beam path is very tight and that signals from your node will very quickly fall into the -60dbm gain range of the antenna being virtually eliminated at the time it leaves the antenna, after that house construction will also attenuate the signal as well.   By the time you get indoors your node is but a speck of noise  compared to the internal RF reception of all the homes own devices.

3) WIFI is a Carrier Sense Multiple Access protocol. They are more likely to cause you trouble with corrupting some of your packets because they will in no way be able hear your node 21 miles away meaning they will think the channel is clear (hidden transmitter syndrome)

4) Setups like ours have been around for a long time under Commercial Wireless Internet Service Providers.  How often do you hear someone complain they can't get WIFI because of them?  Heck houses even use a WISP connection and than run WIFI in the same house some times and not report issues.

Household connections need to worry about the Microwave Oven (which really wipes out the band indoors) more than they need to worry about us outdoors.