[Battlemesh] Wifi-Opp

[F L]

Flooding performance corresponds to how much content you can send from nodes in the traces being source and constantly flooding to all other nodes being recipients.
Since we lose some time for the election of mobile AP nodes, this is where nothing is transferred and hence some capacity is lost.
I still had in mind that we achieved 90%-10% but you're right, we are below these values. A good tradeoff (comparing Fig 1 and 4) is when we use a scanning time of 150s which uses 5 times less energy than WiFi Ad Hoc (20%) with a flooding performance of 70% of what WiFi Ad Hoc would provide.

We'll confirm all this through experiments very soon.

Cheers,
--
Franck
 
On 20.10.2011, at 13:39, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:

>>>> We have proposed an alternative to WiFi Ad Hoc called WiFi-Opp, which
>>>> is more flexible and doesn't require pairing (as in WiFi Direct which
>>>> we tested on Galaxy SII).
> 
>>> Very interesting work, although I'm not sure it's an alternative to
>>> ad-hoc.
> 
>> Well, our goal is to allow "ad hoc" communications w/o WiFi ad hoc using
>> stock phones (non routed/jailbreaked)
> 
> I understand that, and I think it's a great line of research.  I'm only
> suggesting that you should use a more mellow formulation than "an
> alternative to WiFi Ad Hoc".
> 
>> 90% of the flooding performances of what WiFi ad hoc would provide
> 
> I'm probably just being slow, but once again: what is your measure of
> "flooding performance"?  I cannot find it defined in either the paper or
> your previous mail.
> 
> Also, the paper claims 70% and 20% if I read the graphs right, so where
> are the 90% and 10% figures coming from?
> 
>> iPhones can connect to any already existing wifi ad hoc network...but
>> cannot create one if none exists in the first place.
> 
> Ah, I see.  That sucks.
> 
> -- Juliusz