> 1) I didn't know that the common mesh network protocols identificate a > gateway, building a Spanning Tree (I imagine their gateway is the tree root) > while NetSuKuKu does NOT. This is the MOST important difference, to me.
Of course. This is because in the case of the Mesh you need an Internet gateway. In the case of Netsukuku you _are_ part of the network, so there is not the concept of a gateway towards another network. > 2) I didn't know that Wireless Mesh Networks use standard IP protocol as > network layer. So, I could say they'e the equivalent of the ethernet ? If you mean that deploy a wireless mesh network in a neighbourhood is the same as passing cables to build a big LAN, yes it is pretty much like that. > 3) I didn't know that the TCP/IP is a different stack and it's NOT included > in the systems defined by the ISO/OSI stack. I don't understand what you mean here :( > I was trying to leverage the knowledge that the general audience gained > about p2p systems, such as BitTorrent, eMule and others. Most p2p systems are not *really* distributed. Torrent relies on the "tracker" that is a Single Point of Failure. eMule relies on central ed2k servers... and so on. Only DHT based p2p systems are really distributed, even if they rely on bootstrap nodes. You have to be careful because wrong analogies tend to confuse people. See you in Tor Vergata if you pass by :) Saverio _______________________________________________ Netsukuku mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/netsukuku
