Find my comments in line. On 30/09/14 17:56, Javier Cardona wrote: > Hi Pau, > > I agree with your assessment: 11s brings a number of benefits over ad-hoc. > In addition to the ones you listed, I would add: > > 6. symmetric security (SAE)
In AdHoc it is possible to use WPA2 PSK, however the implementation of SAE in 11s is probably better because of a cleaner integration. > 7. customizable path selection mechanism (which you could use with your > custom routing) I suppose you mean the possibility of using a different routing protocol instead of HWMP such as OLSR (I've seen there is already some implementation on this). However in our case we are not trying to integrate 11s with bat-adv/bmx6 but just use 11s as layer 1-2 and bat-adv/bmx6 as layer 2.5/3. > 8. power save Yes, that is great, I've seen another post talking about 802.11s in Android, that could bring us many possibilities too :) > 9. interoperability: there are some incompatible ad-hoc implementations > out there as WFA did not test above 11 Mbps. open80211s made vendor > neutrality and interoperability a priority since day one. Right, we've experienced such incompatibilities and this is actually one of the points we are sick of Ad-Hoc. > The only point that is debatable is 2: there aren't that many cards/drivers > that support it. We try to stick at Atheros drivers so here 11s seems to have even better support than Ad-Hoc. > Best of luck, > Thank you for your comments Javier. > Javier > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Pau via Devel <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hello. >> I'm one of the developers of the libre-mesh project [1]. Our aim is to >> develop an OpenWRT based solution for quick and easy building free/libre >> mesh networks. >> >> Our network architecture is quite different from the common ones, we are >> mixing two routing protocols in layer2 and layer3 (batman-adv and bmx6). >> You can find more information about it here [2]. >> >> Until now we were using Ad-Hoc as link layer, however recently we have >> started to consider the idea of using 11s instead. We are not interested >> in the routing layer (HWMP) because we need some features provided by >> batman-adv, so we disable it by setting the option mesh_forwarding to >> false. >> >> I've already performed some tests and the results look quite good. Using >> 11s instead of ad-hoc bring us some advantages which are: >> >> 1. Better support for 11n >> 2. Better compatibility with drivers >> 3. You can bridge an 11s interface to another interface if necessary >> 4. It does NOT try to synchronize the TSF counter of your wifi card >> 5. You can create up to 8 11s VAP mixed with adhoc, AP, client, etc... >> 5. Get benefit of a newer protocol design >> >> I would like to know your opinion on this topic. None of us now deeply >> how 11s works, so we don't really know if what we are trying to do is a >> madness or a good idea. It would be also very interesting for us to know >> which options can we tun for getting better profit of using 11s as link >> layer. >> >> Thank you for your efforts on developing 11s. >> >> Cheers. >> >> [1] https://dev.libre-mesh.org/projects/libre-mesh >> [2] >> https://dev.libre-mesh.org/projects/libre-mesh/wiki/NetworkArchitecture >> -- >> ./p4u >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel > -- ./p4u
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
