On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek <j...@irif.fr> wrote: >>> 1. ad-hoc mode doesn't work as well as infrastructure mode; > >> Has anyone tries using 802.11s configured interface? > > Interesting idea. I'd be surprised if it worked much better than plain > ad-hoc mode, but I'd love to be proved wrong. >
I had really bad experience with adhoc mode, so I'm willing to try 802.11s and my feeling is that nothing can be as bad as adhoc. Friend just shared this great discussion from 2014: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/babel-users/2014-November/001786.html This gives quite a nice background explanation, so thank you Juliusz from the past :) What I'm trying to find from this mailing list? Just not to repeat tests that others have done, and of others have some best practices to share them. But if nobody has compared babel on adhoc and 802.11s routers then my team and I'll do this test and report back. >>> If you're using diversity routing (Babel-Z), be >>> aware that current versions of babeld are unable to automatically >>> determine the channel number of interfaces in AP mode -- you'll need to >>> set them manually. > >> We are using wlan-slovenia firmware, and AFAIK this is regular babel. >> I'll read up on babel-z. > > It's included in the babeld binary. Just add "diversity true" to the > config file. > > The protocol is described here: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chroboczek-babel-diversity-routing Thanks, I'll look into this. _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
