Hi Federico! You know, every time someone says Santa doesn't exist, an elf gets eaten by a reindeer. Santa does exist! You just have to tell him what you want.
So, I look at this, from a commercial perspective, and I see this great infrastructure that just needs to sit at a frozen production version and have a different, namely very Simple, UI over just a tiny handful of variables for the user. It only will need to manage 802.11s, and we need to standardize on some very cheap radios that anyone can use as far as a supported production version. I am getting test equipment in from China for both very inexpensive units and some wave-2 based radios. Then we need to get a nicer looking map to deploy the radios and dump a few stats and be able to change a few things like SSID or captive portal page from a simple control panel. This is all, really, along with maybe some RADIUS output formatted nicely, to get this mainstream. What we have here is like Linux itself, and the market wants to do is run an Application. If this simple config can become the end-deliverable, it is still OpenWISP, but maybe v3, something simple for everyone to use, and then users can flash whatever radios they want, or they can get the standard issue ones. I am ready to make our GPS-based mobile-app map work as a control panel for OpenWISP, and I have both an OpenWRT/RADIUS guy, a low-level firmware guy, and a group of core programmers ready to take this in a direction that we are ready to go out and sell. Maybe we set up a server for a cloud-based application of the simple version and people can pay a nominal fee to help financing some of this development. I don't think you want to carry this world on your shoulders forever for free, do you? I do wish you would give some of the technical details that you keep alluding to. Can we get some real templates for your 802.11s client and gateway, and batman-adv configs appended to this thread, and maybe a short paragraph on the conceptual replacement for ipam for new ip's for newly deployed units? Now that would Really be helpful for a lot of people, and the whole point here is we don't need everyone re-inventing the wheel. Right now it is just too complicated, and maybe it is all in your head and that is great, but down here in the trenches, we are not much smarter than the 10-year-olds that this needs to serve in these underdeveloped regions where this technology needs to land. Thanks for your consideration, and Ho Ho Ho! Stuart On Friday, November 9, 2018 at 10:25:33 PM UTC+5:30, Federico Capoano wrote: > > Stuart, an ipam system for what you need to do is overkill. > > I also want to make openwisp able to be used by anyone, (not a 10 years > old maybe :-P) and I assure you that if I had the resources to do it I > would have already done it .. but hey if it was so easy to build a system > so complex that is super easy to use and also free of charge someone else > would have probably done it earlier than me. > > It's cool that you want to join forces but I cannot lie to you and tell > you Santa Claus exists, Santa Claus does not exist and this can't be done > nor easily nor quickly. If you want to join forces and you have technical > people working for you, get them to participate in this community and > coordinate with us on specific issues like other contributors have been > doing and we'll be able to get some stuff done and improve the system in a > way that is useful for you. > > Federico > > > > On Friday, November 9, 2018 at 7:12:11 AM UTC+1, Stuart Trusty wrote: >> >> Hi Federico, >> >> I should mention that I have seen https://github.com/openwisp/django-ipam >> , https://github.com/openwisp/openwisp-ipam, and this post -> >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/openwisp/_TIF0bD8NYA ; you know >> what I am trying to accomplish- make it so a 10-year old can set this up- >> so, this isn't ultimately helpful. I saw your expo Twitter post, and >> pulled the PDF, it is very cool, and based on the request therein I am >> willing to join forces with you; we have a couple of people working on this >> stuff. But I need to turn this into something usable for everyone, and if >> you want to help me coordinate the spec to do this *easily*, I am happy to >> get it programmed. >> >> Thank you again, >> Stuart >> >> On Friday, November 9, 2018 at 8:42:07 AM UTC+5:30, Stuart Trusty wrote: >>> >>> Greetings all, >>> >>> When we set up a template for something like an 802.11s node, the way I >>> see this is that we must fixate it with a single IP like 192.168.1.1, but >>> this isn't conducive to 802.11s, as each router needs 192.168.1.2, .3, etc. >>> for it to function properly. >>> >>> However, the unit can't get on the MAC mesh without knowing its IP in >>> the first place, so using dhcpd in this scenario is a puzzle to me. >>> >>> Is anyone using some dynamic or incremental feature in a template to >>> assign IP's on a group of routers, or I am I thinking about going about >>> this in the wrong way? Clearly Google Wifi has solved this issue, what is >>> the best approach here? >>> >>> Thank you in advance, >>> Stuart >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenWISP" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
