Cert_5_2_01_BecomeActiveRouter.py

34 views
Skip to first unread message

jerome....@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 10, 2017, 5:19:55 AM10/10/17
to openthread-users
Hello,

Trying to run Certification tests on OpenThread device (Cert_5_2_01_BecomeActiveRouter.py) I get an assert error checking state of REED that should be "router" but is "child" in my case.

self.nodes[REED].set_router_selection_jitter(1) is called so the node should go pretty fast from child to router but this is not the case on my test bench...

Do you have an idea about root cause of this issue?

Thanks in advance,

BR
Jerome

Jonathan Hui

unread,
Oct 10, 2017, 12:17:05 PM10/10/17
to jerome....@gmail.com, openthread-users
This is generally not expected.  If possible, can you share the log output (INFO level) and sniffer trace?

--
Jonathan Hui

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "openthread-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openthread-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openthread-users@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openthread-users/41346438-c7bb-4000-9469-682f769fde04%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

jerome....@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 11, 2017, 5:05:49 AM10/11/17
to openthread-users
Hi Jonathan,

I attached the requested log + sniffer trace.

For info in my test:
LEADER addr = 66a591acce126c77
ROUTER1 addr = 369cbb9341337dc3
REED addr = ba06e0adec919ffa

Thanks for your help.

Jerome

LEADER.txt
REED.txt
ROUTER.txt
trace_wireshark_5.2.1.pcapng

Jonathan Hui

unread,
Oct 11, 2017, 12:43:18 PM10/11/17
to jerome....@gmail.com, openthread-users
From the logs, I see the following:

1) REED attempts to become a ROUTER by sending an Address Solicit message.
[0000468531] [MLE]  [INFO]-MLE-----: Sent address solicit to b800

2) REED successfully sent the message to ROUTER (RLOC = 0xf800).
[0000468546] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: Sent IPv6 UDP msg, len:73, chksum:c39f, to:0xf800, sec:yes, prio:low, rss:
[0000468559] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: src: fdde:ad00:beef:0:0:ff:fe00:f801
[0000468568] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: dst: fdde:ad00:beef:0:0:ff:fe00:b800

3) LEADER overhears the Address Solicit message being sent from REED to ROUTER.
[0000468543] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: Frame rx failed, error:UnknownNeighbor, len:58, seqnum:12, type:Data, src:0xf801, dst:0xf800, sec:yes, ackreq:yes

4) REED overhears ROUTER forwarding the Address Solicit message to LEADER (RLOC = 0xb800).
[0000468577] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: Frame rx failed, error:DestinationAddressFiltered, len:58, seqnum:70, type:Data, src:0xf800, dst:0xb800, sec:yes, ackreq:yes

5) LEADER overhears the Address Solicit retransmission being sent from REED to ROUTER.
[0000512695] [MAC]   [INFO]-MAC-----: Frame rx failed, error:UnknownNeighbor, len:58, seqnum:16, type:Data, src:0xf801, dst:0xf800, sec:yes, ackreq:yes

The Wireshark packet trace also confirms that the Address Solicit message is getting sent to the LEADER and an IEEE 802.15.4 ACK is sent in response.

It appears the Address Solicit message (i.e. step 4) is not being received by LEADER, but it is not clear why.  Can you debug your radio layer to see if the packet is being properly received and passed up to OpenThread?

--
Jonathan Hui

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "openthread-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openthread-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to openthread-users@googlegroups.com.

jerome....@gmail.com

unread,
Oct 13, 2017, 9:57:30 AM10/13/17
to openthread-users
Hi,

Thanks Jonathan for detailed explanations on the logs.

Problem is now solved on my side, it was an issue with the way logs are written to the UART (takes too much time). 
---->Disabling the logs makes the test pass.

Strange that we do not get some kind of "timeout warning/error" logs in this case.

BR
Jerome
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages