Yes a layer 2 mesh is protocol dependent, so you're stuck to IP traffic only.
Also, when using a layer 3 mesh, roaming and convergence time can also increase (slowing things down) as when things move around, extra things have to happen... layer 3 stuff... OLSR tables updated, IPs updated, ARP entries updated, etc For instance, if a laptop migrates from one mesh AP to a different mesh AP in L3, they will be assigned an IP in a different subnet, while with a Layer 2 mesh, they can use the same IP. -Matt On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 10:08 -0700, Charles N Wyble wrote: > Rogelio wrote: > > Matt Hardy wrote: > > > >> I guess one question would be is it a Layer 2 or Layer 3 mesh? That > >> would influence what options you have. > >> > > > > Good question. Thus far, I've only played with "layer 2" meshes. > > (MobileIP is, I believe, a "layer 3" one, right?) > > > > Yes that is correct. > > > (Layer 2 meshes, I have heard from others, are "better", but I'm not > > exactly sure why this is the case, to be honest.) > > > > Well. It's completely transparent and application/protocol independent. > > Charles > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
