[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] [lwip-devel] [bug #59966] After several hours of workin
From: |
Thompson, Jeff |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] [lwip-devel] [bug #59966] After several hours of working, need router reset to be able to send mqtt msg bigger than 1460 bytes |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Jan 2021 12:30:39 +0000 |
There is also SharkTap, which I use.
http://www.midbittech.com/index.html
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
-----Original Message-----
From: lwip-users <lwip-users-bounces+jeffthompson=invue.com@nongnu.org> On
Behalf Of goldsimon@gmx.de
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 06:39
To: Mailing list for lwIP users <lwip-users@nongnu.org>
Cc: Dejan Spasovski <spasovski.dejan@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] [lwip-devel] [bug #59966] After several hours of
working, need router reset to be able to send mqtt msg bigger than 1460 bytes
Am 29.01.2021 um 12:26 schrieb Dejan Spasovski:
> From: *Dejan Spasovski* <spasovski.dejan@gmail.com
> <mailto:spasovski.dejan@gmail.com>>
> Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [lwip-devel] [bug #59966] After several hours of working,
> need router reset to be able to send mqtt msg bigger than 1460 bytes
> To: <goldsimon@gmx.de <mailto:goldsimon@gmx.de>>
>
>
> Many thanks for the reply,
>
> Can you tell me please how to setup wireshark between a hardware
> device and router, do I need a switch working in promiscuous mode?
>
> I have microtik router in hand I am checking to see if it has this
> mode... in between any other ideas?
I guess what you're looking for is a "mirror port" on a swich?
You might want to invest in a TAP if you do this more often. A mirror port on a
switch is not that ideal as it migth get the timing wrong (or even migth drop
packets, you never know).
So, either by an expensive TAP (e.g. search for ProfiTAP), a cheap TAP ( tested
one for ~150 EUR and it worked quite nice, although it strips VLAN tags) or
build one yourself (with the downside that you need 2 network cards to monitor,
one for TX and one for RX) like here:
https://www.securityforrealpeople.com/2014/09/how-to-build-10-network-tap.html
(only works for 100 mbit/s, not for gigabit).
The cheapest solution might be to create a software bridge using a windows or
Linux PC (just google it) and then using wireshark on the bridge netif.
Regards,
Simon
>
> Dejan Spasovski
>
>
> Senior Embedded Software & Electronics Systems Design Engineer,
>
> CEO at eXtremeEmbedded,
>
> https://www.xembed.com <https://www.xembed.com>
>
> phone: +389 75 215 449
>
> st. Mariovska 3, 20-1/8
> Skopje, Republic of North Macedonia
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 11:09 goldsimon@gmx.de <mailto:goldsimon@gmx.de>
> <goldsimon@gmx.de <mailto:goldsimon@gmx.de>> wrote:
>
> [Moved here from an invalid bug report]
>
> Am 29.01.2021 um 10:56 schrieb Dejan:
> > [..]
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are company producing seismic sensors based on STM32H7 mcu's
> running lwip
> > and we use mqtt to connect to our own cloud server. On starrup
> devices send a
> > series of short messages and then after this usual handshake with
> the server
> > they start streaming bigger packets of sensor data on a specific
> mqtt topic.
> > The message size is usually from 4KB up to 32 KB sent each second.
> Everything
> > seems to work fine until after several hours (usually 12 to 24
> hrs), we find
> > that we need to restart the main router, otherwise the streaming
> of mentioned
> > packets will be blocked from the router to the server. However the
> device is
> > still able to send tcp mqtt packets that fit in one TCP frame.
> Once the TCP
> > message is to be fragmented in more than one frame (is bigger than
> 1460 buyes)
> > the router will not let it through untill we reset it and we get
> another day
> > of a working device.
> >
> > This behaviour is our several months nightmare and we cannot wrap
> our heads
> > arroud it...
> >
> > If any of you experts have an idea what could be the problem
> please reply.
> >
> > We tried:
> > New server/ broker, different port numbers, different MCU series.
> >
> > Can it be that our low level protocol for TCP is doing something
> wrong so the
> > router remembers this device mac address and wont let it send
> fragmented
> > msgs?
> >
> > The last thing we tried is to change the MAC address of the device
> during the
> > blockage mode and then communication went through until several
> hours later to
> > fall in the same state.
> >
> > Please throw any ideas you have in mind we need to deliver this
> product soon
> > but its obviously no good as it is.
>
> Have you tried monitoring the connection between your device and the
> router using wireshark? That should be the first thing to do, so you
> know what actually happens. Without that, you're practically sitting in
> the dark, doing blind accusations ;-)
>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
lwip-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users