On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Mitar <mitar@tnode.com> wrote:

Hi!

> The trade-off is that only devices with atheros chipsets would be able to
> connect to the mesh. This, to me, is not a good trade-off.

This is a good question. Because sometimes having other chipsets in the
ad-hoc network could influence the network to behave worse. Is it really
so problematic to require Atheros chipset? You would need ath5k/9k
drivers anyway so that you can have both ad-hoc+multiple SSIDs at the
same time. Do you know of other wireless chipsets which allow that with
open source drivers? (I do not, but I am really asking. Because this is
for me one reason why I think going only Atheros might be OK. Because
even other solutions you cannot do.)

For our firmware we are definitely only supporting atheros chipsets, and only a very small subset of devices will be tested and officially supported.

For generally connecting to the mesh there might be other devices e.g. sensor network nodes or byzantium laptops that would then be disallowed from the mesh.

If we can do the 4-address-adhoc then I'm not entirely against it.

> If we get to a point where our routing tables or babeld traffic is getting
> to be too much then that is a good day and we'll have a large mesh with
> enough resources to throw at this problem.

Exactly! :-) First you need a network, to have a problems with the
network. :-)

Mitar

--
http://mitar.tnode.com/
https://twitter.com/mitar_m

_______________________________________________
mesh-dev mailing list
mesh-dev@lists.sudoroom.org
https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/mesh-dev