On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Daniel Drake <[email protected]> wrote: > We already discussed this a lot in another thread. It should not be > automatic. The thread is titled "[Sugar-devel] [Design] Ad-hoc > networks - New Icons"
Yep -- I did read that thread, way back. > In ad-hoc, there is just one beacon master. Due to cheap radios and > interference etc, the beacon master will switch around frequently So there is a scheme for beacon master-y to switch around? If it works in practice -- that actually may do the right thing. > 2. This kind of situation will happen frequently: > > A <-----> B <-----> C > > B can see both users A and C on his network view. A can only see B, > and C can only see B. > B shares an activity. Both A and C join. However, anything done by A > cannot be seen by C and vice-versa, because they are too far apart. Ok, but if they are close enough it will work. The question is: if we tell all our nodes to use the same ESSID (or a set of 3 ESSIDs, one per freq), will independently created networks join and split reasonably well? > Ad-hoc will work well for the cases where the children get together in > a small space and explicitly create a throwaway network. The "small space" works with younger kids. The "explicitly create"... doesn't. Hmmmm. If we wanted the unreliable mesh instead of the unreliable ad-hoc... On F11-XO-1.5 we are lacking - 802.11s driver/firmware (which could be sub'd by open80211s) - NM support (does it play ball w open80211s?) - Sugar support. For F-11 on XO-1 - NM support - Sugar support Would that be correct? cheers, m -- [email protected] [email protected] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
