Soo-Hyun Choi wrote: > On 2/28/06, Michele Battelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi Soo-Hyun, thanks for your reply. I have a few comments: >> >> Soo-Hyun Choi wrote: >> 1. A PhD student at Caltech wrote a patch to seep up a usual >> ns-2 simulation. You can look it up at >> http://netlab.caltech.edu/~weixl/technical/ns2patch/ns2patch.htm. >> >> I will take a look at this >> >> 2. As far as my understanding, several hundred nodes with ns-2 might not be >> a good choice in terms of CPU time, memory consumption, debugging etc etc. >> If your simulation needs to be run with that many nodes, people usually >> write his/her own simulator. >> >> Writing your own code is not the best solution for many reasons (check the >> paper "MANET Simulations: The Incredibles" by Stuart Kurkowski et al.), >> that's why I would like to stick with ns-2. So far I managed to have a 600 >> hundred nodes static wireless network with my own agent, running within >> 10seconds. I am trying to reduce more the running time by avoiding useless >> ns-2 internal information storage. >> > > This issue would be very controversial depending on a simulation study > that you are running. And people in networking research community have > different views on this. Writing your own code may be worse than using > an existing tool (e.g. NS-2), but that does not necessarily mean that > you are on the right track just because you use NS-2. Conversely, the > fact that you use your own simulator for your study does not mean that > you are doing a wrong way of research. > > So I will leave this issue on your own decision. By the way, the > intention of the paper is not about using ns-2 or not, but about a > self-developed simulator which we don't (or cannot) trust. > >
I agree with what you say, but the only reason for which I am using ns-2, instead of a (easier) home-grown C simulator is _reproducibility_ of results. This is also the key point in Kurkowski's paper. Make your own research (and code) available to the community such that it can be re-used, debugged and confirmed. ns-2 or your own simulator are equally valid tools if you correctly describe the way you use them. The choice of ns-2 makes it easier. Thanks again for your help Regards, Michele
