Closed mweinelt closed 5 years ago
additional ideas for this from my forum post: https://forum.freifunk.net/t/archer-c7-v-4-0/16384/7
Checklist for now:
- [ ] Flash from stock possible
- [ ] Flash back to stock possible
- [ ] sysupgrade is working (check with flashing + erasing settings)
- [ ] autoupdater working (implied by sysupgrade working?)
- [ ] Working WAN/LAN Ports + associated LED(s)
- [ ] Wifi LED working and blinking
- [ ] Wifi: 11s and AP Mode working in tandem / at least one of them
- [ ] Is there a possibility for user triggered reset (button,POE-Reset, etc)
- [ ] MAC: Is the official MAC(usually wlan0) the same as printed on the device/packaging?
- [ ] ... More?
Any other additions I might have missed?
MAC: clarifiy this point that this should be checked like "idem to meshid" (=default routername-suffix, i do not know how this will be on the map for babel)
@blocktrron @achterin maybe you can contribute to the suggested checklist
- [ ] tested with x clients
- [ ] tested with x neighbors
- [ ] tested with x Mbit throughput
- [ ] tested fastd: x Mbit VPN throughput
- [ ] tested tunneldigger: x Mbit VPN throughput
Throughput tests sounds like a nice idea! However I think we would need to specify and document how to do them then as we would otherwise get varying results.
Throughput tests will vary with several factor: MTU,bandwidth available, encryption, load on gateways, etc... I wouldn't add that, as it's really depending on too many factors. A general area (10-13 MBits) would be ok, but not really dependable anyway.... The same with the clients, neighbours and different VPNs - without a real world scenario over a good timeframe (2/3 weeks) no conclusions can be drawn.
So, in my opinion: stick to basic yes/no function tests
Throughput is a dealbreaker. If everything works in principle, but you can only achieve 2 mbit/s, the node is not usable. Sure you could change the question to
[ ] VPN throughput at least 10 mbit/s
but you'll have to measure it anyways. Might as well enter result then.
My opinion below:
Yay:
sysupgrade [-n]
or firstboot
Optional:
Nay:
First a comment on @mweinelt:
wired network: should correctly map LEDs to ports: In my opinion all LEDs should be mapped correctly.
primary mac should match address on device (or packaging)
Nay=No?
About throughput: I think it is important to test not the throughput, but test if the device is not crashing once there is much load (for example the Fonera Router runs fine with all tests, but it crashes, as soon as there are more than some clients and they start causing traffic):
I'd like the developers to focus on getting devices to work. The userbase should start testing that integration asap and report back issues. The userbase are many people that can far better find bottlenecks. I'd like to remind you of #125 where a proper limit to client counts couldn't be found as there are too many variables to that.
i vote for the current proposal by @mweinelt .
current status: we decided to put the checklist on github as part of a pull request template, see #1433 for progress on this
fixed by adding it to the gluon github wiki: https://github.com/freifunk-gluon/gluon/wiki/Device-Integration-checklist ( done by @mweinelt )
What needs to be verified to do integration testing for a new device. Let's create a checklist.
@Brother-Lal wanted to take care of that.
Make use of our notes from the meeting here: https://md.darmstadt.ccc.de/gluon-device-support-policy#