(...) >> >> >> BTW Richard, as far as I remember the problems with 802.11s seemed to be: >> 1) the standard is not a standard and it was intentionally crippled >> 2) the drivers were very b0rked and broken (and Marvel did a terrible job >> with the driver software) >> >> Scalability to less than 30 laptops in one room was the result. >> A standard good AP and standard laptops can go to 30 in one room (with >> standard settings). >> So, there was definitely something broken with the Marvel solution. >> >> Fix layer 2 first, then look at layer 3. > > Yes, Yes, I'm not trying to defend the previous mesh implementation in any > way. Pretend the previous OLPC "mesh" does not exist. And in fact on a XO > 1.5 it does not exist. >
OK. Didn't know. > I'm saying that the bulk of our rollouts are dense scenarios connected to an > AP. If we can do better density than an AP with less equipment then thats > something to go for. yes, you can - take the RIPE example: just reduce the txpower and have multiple APs. There are also some very smart APs with a central controlling AP out there (Cisco has some of those). These APs balance out the clients "magically". > If you can't do better than an AP then unless you are doing the > minimal-infra wide area part of mesh there isn't much in it that will help > the bulk of OLPC rollouts. > Well - the issue is IMHO that OLPC always sold the public on the mesh idea. So it is somewhat of a bummer that the mesh is gone now. I might add that the Funkfeuer/Freifunk -style outdoor meshes are still another totally cool option: you can mesh the different schools this way very cheaply. So that is another thing to consider IMHO. >> PS: can you forward my answer to the lists? I am not subscribed... > > Sure but I'm not on iaep so I can't help there. > thx!
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
