> Where would i find a simple 2 page user-facing whitepaper explaining > what the minimum topology at home is where babel provides better > user experience over the alternatives, and how exactly the user benefits.
In-charter example: Section 7 of draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison-02: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mrw-homenet-rtg-comparison-02#section-7 Out-of-charter example with formal evaluation: http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1747&context=infopapers (Note that this paper compares Babel, which aims at being a generalist routing protocol, with dedicated mesh protocols that are presumably fine-tuned for this kind of topology.) > why are home router vendors not all over it ? Home networks currently have a degenerate tree topology (a single NAT box with two to five connected links), with no path diversity whatsoever, and hence no optimisation opportunities. Smart routing protocols will only become an issue once we have more exciting topologies in home networks. Yes, I know, chicken and egg. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
