On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Sridhar Dhanapalan <[email protected]> wrote: > * we need the XS to behave well on an *existing* network (i.e. > single interface), without trying to be a gateway or duplicating core > network services (DNS, DHCP, etc.)
Yes, and that's the direction in which I want to take the XS. > * while other XS efforts are keen to add features, we want to be as > trim as possible Agreed -- I want to keep XS as simple as possible. > We started the XS-AU when it had become clear that XS development had ... and XS-AU was done in a very useful way; Jerry's work is in many senses stuff that I intend to follow with the XS going forward. > We've been working on a prototype "XS Lite", which is essentially an > XS-AU with everything except ejabberd stripped away. Our deployments > are done at the classroom-level; a teacher receives XOs for the > children in their class once they have completed the necessary > training. We would like to provide a simple server with that > allocation of XOs. This means that the server needs to be low-cost and > easy to implement (plug-and-play). We are assuming that there is *no* > technical expertise available at the school. That's an interesting concept. I hadn't thought of that. If this classroom-XS runs its own network, and nothing else, you'll need hostap, or an AP. If it's going to be part of a wider network (school-wide, perhaps w Internet access) it needs 2 NICs. Ah, I see you've thought of that. > the XO's WLAN can be the AP Note that running hostap is not a trivial endeavour. cheers, m -- [email protected] [email protected] -- Software Architect - OLPC - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Server-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/server-devel
