"Meshing may not be free. I think we agree."

Well, parts of it will not be free. However, I still think that even though routing someone else's packets does not benefit me directly, it is this activity which gives rise to the mesh. I guess, "do unto others..." P2P is basically the same...remember, in the simplest versions there was never any need to make content available. However, P2P-ers seemed to innately understand that P2P won't really be possible unless one is a source as well as a sink.

In the WiFi version it'll be easy to start to "triage" certain kinds of activity as battery power runs thin...first, a throttle down to only routing packets of a certain application (or VLAN or whatever). (This actually does make sense because it eats a hell of a lot more battery power transmitting a packet than receiving it.) Second, when the battery is within X minutes of dying then only listening and not transmitting.

But I think my main point holds: even 'reglar' folks will realize that there's a "gobal" benefit to routing someone else's packets, even if that does eat into remaining battery time.

-TD



From: "Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Meshing costs, the price of RAH's battery
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:09:45 -0700

At 02:36 PM 4/10/04 -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
>At 9:03 PM -0700 4/9/04, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>>So, get a clue.  When your battery runs out, you
>>get *zero* benefit from the mesh.  Or even your local
>>device *sans network*.
>
>Yes, and as your battery starts to run out, you raise the price on
switching.

Yes, as I speculated.

>Your point is?

Meshing may not be free. I think we agree.





_________________________________________________________________
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page � FREE download! http://toolbar.msn.com/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/




Reply via email to