On 1/25/07, Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just thinking off the top of my head, but we may need to NAT because the
AP isn't going to understand the 4-address 802.11s frame format the mesh
uses, which is why we have to NAT.
(...)
I may be completely wrong here; Javier?
You are completely right. Since early in the project we had the
requirement that Mesh Portals work with standard (non-WDS) APs. Of
all the design alternatives that were considered, doing NAT seemed to
be the lesser evil.
On 1/25/07, Dan Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:40 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Of course, that would require fixing Ethernet multicast on the mesh :)
Which is pretty high on Javier's list.
Make it *wish* list. Next week we'll decide whether Marvell or
cozybit will own that task.
Javier
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
