> Before we lose this, let it be noted that we seemed to have arrived at > "no" for an answer to whether we want to deal with non-transitive > networks, *as part of this particular routing protocol discussion*.
This is what the protocol comparison draft has to say on the subject: We believe that IBSS may be out of scope for Homenet, but we expect that people will attempt to use the Homenet protocols in IBSS mode, whether we like it or not. > Without special ND handling, Hidden nodes will fail DAD, and you can't > expect to get a mac address for a node you don't get multicast to. I agree. If we assume unmodified clients, then IBSS is only suitable for router-to-router links. However, I think that Homenet needs a killer feature, and almost-zeroconf router-to-router wireless links might be it. (Now I happen to believe that if Homenet is successful, we will get modified clients -- think Android -- but I realise that this opinion does not necessarily reflect the consensus of this group.) > I *don't* think meshes are out of scope for homenet. I do think meshes > need a mesh routing protocol. I disagree. If you accept that a small mesh is a cheap and convenient way to establish a router-to-router link, then you'll want to avoid the tricky issues that come with running multiple routing protocols (bidirectional redistribution at two distinct points within the network, oh boy). (But then, I'm pretty much bound to disagree. The desire to have a single routing protocol that you let loose on a highly heterogeneous network and it just works is the main driver behind Babel.) > we would be talking about AP / BSS, not ad-hoc / IBSS [...] Massively > reduced marginal links (because when you start losing beacons between AP > and Client, you'll be deassociated.) I strongly disagree. By default, the Linux Intel driver will perform recalibration after it misses 5 beacons in a row. You can have a perfectly functional yet clearly marginal link in AP/STA mode. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
