Hi, On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Russ White <ru...@riw.us> wrote: > >> Can you also say the opposite that rotocols developed for wireless work >> equally well also for wired environments ? If so let me ask why do we >> need both classes of routing protocols ?
I have deployed OLSRv2 both on Ethernet and on wireless environments, without problems. I do not see a reason why OLSRv2 could not run in mixed environments. > I would argue that the OSPF MANET extensions would work just as well for > IS-IS or OSPF in both wirelss and wired networks. The OSPF MANET extensions would certainly be a valid alternative to consider. Which one performs better or is more suited (OLSRv2 / OSPF+MANET / ...) -- I don't know, that would be an interesting comparison. > >> If not I am not sure homenet should focus on wireless router to router >> communication at all. Yes I am in favor of wired env with fiber or with >> nice cat 7 wiring between my routers. > > I am as well, but I think we should allow for both with a single > protocol as much as possible. I agree. Not everyone likes long cables in a home environment. And having a single protocol would be indeed better. > I think OSPF or IS-IS (or even EIGRP) can > be adapted to the low power/lossy network situation, it just takes some > thought and care. We have invested that thought and care in MANET for years now. I think it could be worth investing the suitability of the protocols developed in MANET (as well as the OSPF MANET extensions), before reinventing the wheel. Ulrich > > Russ > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
