I am in agreement.  Mesh is being abused by some people.  Mesh is a
routing mechanism in the same way that RIP and OSPF are routing
mechanisms.  You don't build a RIP or an OSPF, but rather you employ
RIP or OSPF to organize and automate your routing.  That is all we are
doing with OLSR, just adding another routing option.

I think we'll start describing the new routing as WEB Routing, and let
the MESH guys have their buzzwords.

Lonnie

On 2/27/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lonnie,
>
> What I might not have made clear in previous posts, MESH is to broad a term
> to discuss. The way most people would deploy MESH networks today, I feel is
> flawed.
> I'm referring to wireless with large number of hops between end to end
> points to blanket an area.
>
> However, I agree and its worth recognizing that some concepts that are used
> for MESH are very worthly of recognition, and a step in the right direction
> to improve and smarten routing for wireless network. A perfect example of
> this is the open source core to Star-OS's MESH technology. The attempt is to
> be able to make smarter decisions, not jsut on Up/Down or shortest path
> conditions, but packet loss or latency of the link for example.  OSPF, has
> been a standard for years for automatic internal network routing, but it is
> really inadequate for Wireless. It can't consider factors that are common to
> wireless. For example a marginal link apposed to a down link.  MESH is
> working hard to improve intelligent routing based on QOS of links.  So
> Star-OS is nothing but a stronger product because it add the MESH features.
> But I don't feel what it adds is "mesh".  Mesh is not a protocol, its a
> topology. MEsh can;t be added to a radio, a designer uses radios to deploy
> MESHes.  What Star-OS is really adding to its product line is SMARTER
> routing that considers wireless conditions. These techniques, often
> misinterpretted as MESH, can be very useful put to work for an engineered
> network as well. I'd love to have a protocol that could determine which path
> to take based on packet loss. But I'd deploy that on my master Super cell
> router between backhauls, not deploy my network like a huge city mesh with
> Radios every 600 feet to blanket an area using the technology.
>
> I think people are confusing "MESH", a topology, with protocols utilized by
> MESH.  The protocols used in MESH are worthly. My larger point in previous
> Emails is that the intelligence of these advance and ambitious new
> protocols, still isn't good enough. It doesn't consider all the factors that
> need to be considered to make the most intelligent decissions to replace the
> network designer, who otherwise would make those decissions. Off the top of
> my head I can't recall all the reason, but two might have been, the inabilty
> to track several hops deep, or consider the dollar cost of the decission.
>
> So in summary, "Progress" is not a "Solution".  Progress is a science
> project, and sometimes gets us closer to the goal, and often deserves an
> award for its innovative ideas, but none the less, progress still is just
> progress.  When the end goal is reached, it becomes a solution.
>
> My fear is that there are millions of combinations of things to consider to
> determine the best path and how it will effect others.  The inteligence to
> compile the data to all the factors would be almost like a Neuro network,
> (or what every that name is), and the processing power of rotuer CPE boards
> available today, wouldn't have enough processing power to consider it all in
> real time, at packet speed.
>
> MESH protocols (not topology, unless you use Cisco's definition :-) has
> promise, and I see it on the forefront for further innovation by innovators,
> however, it has had promise for the last five years, and is no where near a
> solution yet.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>
>
> Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
> routing that determined when a path had stopped and chose another one.
>
> You have controlled this by your choice of units to make those cross
> connections and really all that is happening is that the mesh routing
> is constantly testing to see if it needs to try another route.
>
> We used to do this manually and what a pain it was.  This new routing
> does what I used to do, except it does not sleep, have bathroom breaks
> or go out for lunch.  You can assign weights to connections and force
> your chosen route to get used, at least until it goes down, which
> hopefully never happens, but if and when it does you are covered with
> your alternate path.
>
> What is so terrible about that?
>
> Lonnie
>
> On 2/24/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Brad,
> >
> >  I agree. Our downtown Mesh versus Cell/Sector trials proved exactly that.
> > Our tests showed that the cities like DC could be better served with
> > Cell/Sector models more effectively.
> > As a matter of fact, Alvarion product, appeared to be well equiped for
> > that
> > task.
> > I think projects like Phili's will bring a rude awakening. I can't prove
> > that, but there is no reason for me to.
> > Thats the point of modelling. So you can pre-dict BEFORE you spend.
> > Its the Muni's budget to pay for, to find the true answer, not mine.
> >
> > Tom DeReggi
> > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:49 PM
> > Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
> >
> >
> > > Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but
> > > it
> > > has yet to prove itself in a large deployment with 1,000's of customers
> > > or
> > > 1,000's of nodes deployed. I too have first hand experience backhauling
> > > several mesh projects and the mesh edge so far has not been easy at all.
> > > Here in Northeast USA 15 mesh nodes per square miles doesn't even come
> > > close
> > > to what's needed. I've also found that implementing mesh in major metro
> > > areas, where there are already 1,000's of wifi access points, shrinks
> > > coverage models and can turn a well intentioned response to an RFP
> > > laughable. I believe Philadelphia projects 70k users in 5 years on 3900
> > > mesh
> > > nodes backhauled by Canopy. We'll see.
> > >
> > > I'd love to see a comparison of our BreezeAccess VL with one mile
> > > centers
> > > and our high powered DS11 on the edge in Anytown USA vs mesh. I'm
> > > working
> > > on
> > > a few of my guys to do such a test so stay tuned.
> > >
> > > What it comes down to is the fact that Matt may have just the right
> > > terrain
> > > and noise floor without the traffic that some of these larger projects
> > > will
> > > get hammered with so it works for his company. Mesh is a tool for a
> > > certain
> > > job just like other gear. But I don't believe mesh should be construed
> > > as
> > > broadband for the masses in any major metro area. Brad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:28 PM
> > > To: WISPA General List
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
> > >
> > >
> > > Matt,
> > >
> > > I think you are misinterpretting my comments. Don't read more in to them
> > > than are there.
> > > I am in no way attacking the validity of your experience or comments.
> > > I'm
> > > simply asking for more detail, so that I can learn from your experience.
> > >
> > > --
> > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> > >
> > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> > >
> > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
> > --
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
>
>
> --
> Lonnie Nunweiler
> Valemount Networks Corporation
> http://www.star-os.com/
> --
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> --
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>


--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to