[Battlemesh] Battlemesh v5 tests
bh at udev.org
Mon Mar 5 17:32:38 CET 2012
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Clauz <clauz at ninux.org> wrote:
> On 03/01/2012 01:37 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>>> So, here are some ideas:
>> Excellent. Thanks a lot for your work, Clauz.
>> In the "Channel Surfer" test, I'd like to see throughput results (not
>> necessarily taken into account in the competition, just for my own
> I think we can easily measure that.
>> I'm not sure it's possible -- but if we have the hardware, I'd like to
>> see a test with multi-radio nodes.
> I don't know if we have multi-radio, so the tests are designed for
> single-radio devices.
That's a fundamental problem. Even with static routing you cannot hope
to have something usable for basic TCP transfers.
Forget about hoping over the same frequency.
> Babel(z) is AFAIK the only protocol (of the battlemesh) designed to be
> radio/channel-aware, so I wonder what other protocol developers think
> about this test, and if they think that a protocol not designed to be
> radio-aware can however choose the best path...
Protocols that use metrics more intelligent then packet-loss based
should be able to detect fast links.
Babel is not able to make the difference between a 1G and 100M
ethernet link for example.
The same problem when your radio changes from 5M to 11M.
And that's probably the case for other routing protocols as well.
Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org>
FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-3500762
"In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software
patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy.
Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of
software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent
court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their
favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or
democratically elected legislators."
More information about the Battlemesh