No im not falling for that trap. Your example used a 100% node to node
connection rate, that is not reasonable for wireless.
2 to 5 radios/node is. This reduces the network update messages. My idea
with a 3 radios is 1 BH AP, 1 BH CPE, 1 Client
AP. The BH CPE should be smart enough to know where
Jack Unger wrote:
You raise some good points... and here are some more differences
between Matt's fully-meshed WIRED network example and the real-world
conditions under which WIRELESS mesh networks are so often deployed
today.
My example actually used wireless P2P links, although it was
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
Jeromie,
You raise some good points... and here are some more differences between
Matt's fully-meshed WIRED network example and the real-world conditions
under which WIRELESS mesh networks are so often deployed today.
1) REROUTING
://www.wirelessmapping.com
-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 1:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
Jeromie,
You raise some good points... and here are some more differences between
Matt's fully-meshed WIRED
Brian, Exactly my thoughts. And I'm with you in the show me category. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Brian Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:01 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
Jack,
Let me jump in with some
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
Jeromie,
You raise some good points... and here are some more differences between
Matt's fully-meshed WIRED network example and the real-world conditions
under which WIRELESS mesh networks are so often deployed today.
1
I haven't read your summary yet, but would like to chime in a bit on Mesh...
When the DoD developed TCP/IP, they built it to be robust under war-time
conditions. This means fault tolerant, rerouting, change-over, change-back.
It would wonderful to hear the Mesh scientists (not sales people)
The internet is the largest mesh network in operation today. However,
there is no comparison to internet routing and redundancy to that of
private network routing and redundancy. The internet is so huge that
smart routing decisions can only be made at the edge. With a private
network, the size
Hey Matt,
It would be nice to see this in a word
document or Text based so one could add comments to your work.
DSJ
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006
2:56 PM
To: WISPA
General List
Subject: [WISPA]
The file is attached as RTF.
-Matt
Dustin Jurman wrote:
Hey Matt,
It would be nice to see this in a word document or Text based so one
could add comments to your work.
DSJ
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It didn't attach correctly.
DSJ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 6:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
The file is attached as RTF.
-Matt
Dustin Jurman wrote
Matt,
Are these actual costs?
What is the coverage area?
Thanks,
Dawn
Matt Liotta wrote:
Attached is a quick rundown of basic mesh theory that I put together
in light of the recent thread. It hasn't been peer reviewed or edited,
which I would normally do before sharing publicly. But since I
I used street pricing for the radios in question, but certainly didn't
cover pricing on any other items that would be required. Coverage area
wasn't taken into consideration as it has no bearing on topology.
-Matt
Dawn wrote:
Matt,
Are these actual costs?
What is the coverage area?
Thanks,
There is a very big difference from fiber mesh and wireless mesh.
Wireless is classicly a bunch of HDX links
where fiber is PtP links. Your example doesnt make it clear that the
difference is what cause's 802.11[a|b|g]
mesh suck and fiber/copper mesh's not suck. The solution is multi
radio
My example used wireless P2P links, which has no inherent weakness over
fiber P2P links from a topology point-of-view. It would appear you are
falling into the same trap as others by forcing mesh to be something it
is not. Mesh is just a network topology; no more, no less. Sure it is
possible
Jeromie,
You raise some good points... and here are some more differences between
Matt's fully-meshed WIRED network example and the real-world conditions
under which WIRELESS mesh networks are so often deployed today.
1) REROUTING - Only a node failure or a high peak traffic load would
16 matches
Mail list logo