On Feb 19, 2015, at 6:41 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[email protected]> wrote: > Basically, Dave Taht and Jim Gettys have been working a lot in these > "marginal networks". They have a lot of experience. Personally, I don't see > their kind of networks as something Homenet needs to support. I can see us > needing to support a few wifi bridging hops, but what they're referring to is > a quite different beast.
I think it's reasonable to assume that the network will be somewhat marginal; if it's really seriously marginal though maybe the right thing to do is have a UI for reporting that to the user so that they can try to fix it. But we want it to work to the extent possible regardless, because we are targeting end-users who may not be competent to respond to UI indications of that sort. Dealing with marginal networks obviously isn't something that's going to happen in an apartment in Stockholm, but it's pretty easy to imagine something like that where I live out in the country, and both Dave and Jim have similar situations. This is exacerbated in my case because we used a lot of building materials with metal foils in them, and that messes with radio propagation. I think in Dave's case it's just distance. The point is that I can completely understand your skepticism about this, but there's a reason why some working group participants have been pushing for functionality in the more marginal cases. I don't think HNCP has a particular problem here, but maybe Markus can speak to that. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
