What you are suggesting here is heresy. You are saying that the basic assumption made 35 years ago, Layering, doesn't work. What a surprise. It is not only true for WiFi, we are confronting the same problem with higher layers and applications wanting to send/receive precise timing information over the network and that capability not being supported by Ethernet.
The bottom line is that the layering that was defined so many years ago by the pioneers was imperfect. In particular, it was highly imperfect in putting forth what was not defined in the layering model that we all have used (MoL). It is no surprise (to me, at least) that we are running into trouble as IP over 802 is now being called upon to take over the entire communications space that was formerly occupied by the switched and decimated low-noise, low-loss links of the hard-wired and legacy telephony networks. To that end, it has never been clear to me that you can effectively use a screwdriver to pound nails. Geoff Thompson "The wishes of Marketing have remarkably little to do with the laws of Physics" > On Aug 7, 2015, at 7:44 AMPDT, Weil, Jason <[email protected]> wrote: > > In my experience there seems to be very little overlap between engineers > working in the IEEE and those working in the IETF. My company for example > has exactly zero overlap. IPv6 Multicast over IEEE 802.11 seems to be a > good example of how more interaction would be immensely useful early on in > the protocol development process. I¹m not sure there is a fix here, but it > would definitely be useful for both SDOs to keep in mind each others > protocols for interoperability purposes instead of just pointing to the > other to fix their protocols.
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
