[P2P-F] Critical data on wireless meshes Fwd: [Arch-econ] Potential for global routeability in wireless mesh netsusing ipv6
Aaron Huslage
huslage at gmail.com
Wed Mar 23 01:01:29 CET 2011
This is a difficult and technical discussion, but basically what he's saying
is that it mostly works; that most meshes don't NEED to scale so they will
work alright. 802.11s, HSLS, OSLR, BATMAN, etc are all protocols that only
scale so far while retaining good user experience.
I really feel like this is punting. We don't have a workable, scalable
solution to a global p2p internet. We will be creating the same problems
that the Internet currently has...multiple networks, loosely connected. This
sounds like a great idea, but has HUGE pitfalls (like easy
filtering/censorship, disconnectability, etc).
We need a new paradigm. Sitting here stuck in the "it's hard" or "we know
how to do this already" camp isn't getting us anywhere. Wireless is a valid
last mile solution, but in terms of mesh it fails as a backhaul
solution...since mesh is not a solution to anything.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Gordon Cook <cook at cookreport.com> wrote:
> From peter ecclesine what i regard as a rather definitive statement on
> where p2p mesh is heading.
>
> I a follow u messaGE TO ME HE called HSLS is just another proprietarymesh color emphasis mine.
>
> My reason for calling attention to this is that before effort is spent on
> wireless meshes one better know from a technical point of view what is
> possible as well as what a standards compliant interface means from an
> economics and interoperable point of view.
>
> Aaaron if you are able would you respond to comments that may be raised - I
> am on the book deadline i have been discussing with you
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *"Peter Ecclesine (pecclesi)" <pecclesi at cisco.com>
> *Date: *March 22, 2011 6:31:50 AM EDT
> *To: *"Economics of IP Networks" <arch-econ at cookreport.com>
> *Subject: **Re: [Arch-econ] Potential for global routeability in wireless
> mesh netsusing ipv6*
> *Reply-To: *Economics of IP Networks <arch-econ at cookreport.com>
>
> Hi Gordon,
>
> A couple of comments on what Sascha is saying about overhead and scaling
> mesh.
>
> In IEEE 802.11, we have been working on layer 2 mesh since 2005. In
> early 2005 we received a US Navy Research Labs proposal based on 15 years
> experience with mesh in Navy applications [algorithms disclosed starting on
> page 20]
>
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/05/11-05-0142-01-000s-proposal-dynamic-backbone-mesh.doc
>
> It has each station send one broadcast packet every half second, and
> using consolidated logic, every three seconds it reforms a dynamic backbone
> mesh with one portal to the outside world, and connectivity among all
> stations. The algorithm won an IETF manet bakeoff at NRL using nineteen
> moving pickup trucks to relay traffic around the labs. The algorithms were
> disclosed in 2005 in the reference paper.
>
> HSLS description appears to be more chatty about link state.
>
> DBS has limits in scaling, and in 2008 the 802.11s Project scope was
> relaxed to address larger layer 2 systems.
>
> Last week, 802.11s gave a tutorial of their nearly complete amendment,
> expected to be published in September
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/11/11-11-0380-00-000s-mesh-tutorial.ppt
>
> Over the same timeframe, the SmartGrid industry has deployed smart
> meters using above layer 3 meshing, and now comes to a point where issues of
> security, performance and scaling cannot be ignored. Zigbee has not scaled
> to 12,000 power meter radios per pole top radio, nor scaled in security.
>
> The SGIP Smart Energy Profile group will choose whether to require an
> upgradable security schema or to grandfather the Texas SEP 1.x security
> system (which would be like accepting 802.11 WEP as a part of a security
> architecture).
> http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/pub/SmartGrid/HANTF/Home_Area_Networking_TF_SEP_recommendation_V3.doc
>
> To me, most mesh deployments will not have 20 hops, nor 10,000 nodes, and
> can function at layer 2/3, like switching does.
>
> I don’t see the applicability of HSLS in neighborhoods or highways or
> downtown.
>
> petere
> Peter Ecclesine, Technology Analyst
> MS SJ-14-4 170 West Tasman Dr, San Jose, CA 95134-1706
> Ph 408/527-0815, FAX 408/525-9256
> "Time doesn't fool around." "Without Prejudice" U.C.C. 1-207
> *From:* arch-econ-bounces at cookreport.com [mailto:
> arch-econ-bounces at cookreport.com] *On Behalf Of *Gordon Cook
> *Sent:* Saturday, March 19, 2011 11:16 AM
> *To:* Economics of IP Networks
> *Subject:* [Arch-econ] Potential for global routeability in wireless mesh
> netsusing ipv6
>
> This is a result from a side discussion
>
> and very very interesting to me. peter e or anyone - what is your opinion
> of what sascha is saying?
>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>
> *From: *Sascha Meinrath <meinrath at newamerica.net>
> *Date: *March 19, 2011 10:51:03 AM EDT
> *To: *Gordon Cook <cook at cookreport.com>
> *Cc: *P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>,
> Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>, armin at easynet.co.uk
> *Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Fidonet in community wireless projects?*
>
> Hi all,
>
> On 03/19/2011 12:32 AM, Gordon Cook wrote:
>
> in some way similar? Only in the store and forward sense of making the
> next
>
> hop. Randy bush was backbacking around south america in the 1980s doing
> uucp
>
> and then fido, dave hughes did fido with big sky telegraph, i carried a
> 9600
>
> baud modem to moscow for one of the first russian fidos.
>
>
>
> wireless mesh is MUCH faster BUT although i'd like to see it happen i doubt
> that
>
> it will ever be globally routable. sascha, do you agree or not? If anyone
>
> thinks it can be globally routable please tell me how.
>
>
> IPv6 does allow global routability. Currently, we're working on
> distributed and
> ad-hoc mesh routability at massive scale. I don't think we've yet found a
> limit
> and (thus far) technological improvements have outstripped any scalability
> issues, but the problem of routing overhead is one that we're constantly
> working
> on. Meanwhile, in terms of precursors, I'd look more to ALOHAnet and the
> like.
> Where Fidonet does have a closer parallel is in the notion of diffusion of
> information -- i.e., that key info could move slowly and didn't need to
> suffuse
> the entire network simultaneously. When my team developed HSLS (see:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazy_Sighted_Link_State_Routing_Protocol)
> this was
> the key breakthrough (and what dramatically lowered routing overhead to
> make
> mesh networking far more scalable. Unfortunately, I couldn't convince
> developers I was working with to integrate the best-of tech from European
> folks,
> however, I was able to convince Europeans to integrate best-of tech from
> us. So
> today, BATMAN and olsrd are the standards -- they uses HSLS-like routing,
> and
> the tech scales to incredibly large networks.
>
> --Sascha
>
>
> =============================================================
>
> The COOK Report on Internet Protocol, (PSTN) 609 882-2572 (Skype-in) 609
> 643-4067
>
> Back
>
> Issues:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=37&Itemid=61
>
> <
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=37&Itemid=61>
>
>
> Cook's Collaborative Edge Blog http://gordoncook.net/wp/
>
> Subscription info:
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=65
>
> <
> http://www.cookreport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=65
> >
>
> =============================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 18, 2011, at 6:14 PM, Sepp Hasslberger wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> "FidoNet is a point-to-point and store-and-forward email WAN which uses
> modems
>
> on the direct-dial telephone network. It was developed in 1984, and has
> over
>
> 20,000 public nodes worldwide.
>
>
>
> "FidoNet has been owned and operated primarily by end-users and hobbyists
> more
>
> than by computer professionals. Therefore, social and political issues
> arose
>
> in FidoNet far faster and more seriously than might be expected by those
>
> raised in other network cultures."
>
>
>
> ( this was written in 1992 and is
>
> quoted from http://www.fidonet.org/inet92_Randy_Bush.txt )
>
>
>
> It would seem that there are at least some parallels, and that FidoNet,
>
> although technologically quite different from what we have today, was in
> some
>
> way a predecessor to the local mesh networks that are being established
> here
>
> and there.
>
>
>
> Sepp
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 18, 2011, at 9:59 PM, Sascha Meinrath wrote:
>
>
>
> On 03/18/2011 03:58 PM, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>
> Why don't we ask an expert... Sascha, any comments.
>
>
>
> It's on the decline, but still alive (fidonet.org <http://fidonet.org/> I
>
> think). The
>
> decentralization is similar to some of the community LAN and wireless
>
> technologies, but I wouldn't say Fidonet was a precursor (technologically
>
> speaking). Its hayday was 1980s/90s, but the Web pretty much crushed it
> over
>
> time.
>
>
>
> --Sascha
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> M
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> *From:* Michel Bauwens [mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com]
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2011 11:49 PM
>
> *To:* Michael Gurstein
>
> *Cc:* p2p-foundation; Sepp Hasslberger; armin at easynet.co.uk
>
> <mailto:armin at easynet.co.uk <armin at easynet.co.uk>>
>
> *Subject:* Fidonet in community wireless projects?
>
>
>
> Interesting question, does anyone have the answer?
>
>
>
> I'll relay to FAcebook,
>
>
>
> Michel
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> From: *Facebook* <update+pjiidwm at facebookmail.com
>
> <mailto:update+pjiidwm at facebookmail.com <update+pjiidwm at facebookmail.com>>
>
> <mailto:update%2Bpjiidwm at facebookmail.com>>
>
> Date: Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:41 AM
>
> Subject: Lorraine Lee commented on your link.
>
> To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>
> <mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>> <
> mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>>>
>
>
>
>
>
> facebook
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
> >>
>
>
>
> Hi Michel,
>
> Lorraine Lee commented on your link.
>
> Lorraine wrote: "Whatever happened to Fidonet? Is the dna of fidonet
> alive
>
> in some of there community wireless projects we keep hearing about?"
>
>
>
> See the comment thread
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reply to this email to comment on this link.
>
> Thanks,
>
> The Facebook Team
>
>
>
> See Comment
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/n/?profile.php&id=528245547&v=wall&story_fbid=202735439755014&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge&bcode=BnpORHc7&n_m=michelsub2004%40gmail.com
> >>
>
>
>
> The message was sent to michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>
> <mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>>
>
> <mailto:michelsub2004 at gmail.com <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>>. If you don't
> want to receive these emails
>
> from Facebook in the future or have your email address used for friend
>
> suggestions, you can unsubscribe
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/o.php?k=c05bf5&u=528245547&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge
>
> <
> http://www.facebook.com/o.php?k=c05bf5&u=528245547&mid=3ecb58eG1f7c632bGe0a39e0Ge
> >>.
>
>
>
> Facebook, Inc. P.O. Box 10005, Palo Alto, CA 94303
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net <http://p2pfoundation.net/> -
>
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net <http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/>
>
>
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com <http://p2pfoundation.ning.com/>;
>
> Discuss:
>
> http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
>
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
>
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
>
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Arch-econ mailing list
> Arch-econ at cookreport.com
> http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arch-econ
>
>
>
--
Aaron Huslage - +1-919-600-1712
http://blog.hact.net
IM: AIM - ahuslage; Yahoo - ahuslage; MSN - huslage at gmail.com; GTalk -
huslage at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20110322/4ab66438/attachment.htm
More information about the P2P-Foundation
mailing list