[Battlemesh] WBMv6 test discussion [was: Re: Recon Team - Follow Up]

[Benjamin Henrion]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Simon Wunderlich
<simon.wunderlich at s2003.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
> Hey Frank,
>
> as promised, I'm CCing the battlemesh mailing list here so they
> can join the test discussion.
>
> For the battlemesh mailing list: Prof. Frank Fitzek, Martin Hundeboll
> and the other people from their research team will host the WBMv6 in
> Aalborg University in April 2013. We have started discussing test setups,
> but IMHO all battlemeshers, especially the guys doing the tests the
> last years should be able to join the discussion. So I'm moving the
> discussion to the ml.
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 09:27:50PM +0200, Frank Fitzek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am happy there is interest in testing at all.
>>
>> Benchmarking is the core of engineering. We all like to invent and
>> present the solutions found but then we have to compare the
>> solutions found. In research I only see research papers that show
>> that the own approach is the best. No wonder as they tune the
>> environment as long as they find a spot where they are better. And
>> of course if you go for testing everybody wants to tune the testbed
>> in favor of their own approach.
>>
>> As we want to find the best solution for the real world, it would be
>> great to understand how does the real world look like? In case of
>> wireless mesh I would like to understand what kind of topologies we
>> would like to support. Just one source and once destination
>> communicating over one relay, or a line of relays, or an arbitrary
>> network? Maybe we can get some topologies from open mesh. They have
>> to be some data for that. If not we go for a set of networks that
>> are likely to exist.
>
> Networks in "reality" often look very messy. Even in hotel networks
> where you have some lines of APs per floor, APs from different floors
> may (or may not) be able to connect to each other. There are buildings
> with a lot of LAN uplinks (they could be used as "gateways") and one
> final gateway to the internet. Or there might be only a single DSL
> router in it.
>
> One topology we can find often is "many routers in one spot", or most
> of them can connect to each other - with a more or less good quality.
>
> The "hotel" topology with a few good-connected rows, which are not
> (or not very good) connected with each other would be possible too.
>
> There are also different types of devices: multi-radio devices and
> single-radio devices. I'd suggest to stick with single-radio devices
> for now (this is what we tested the last years too).

You could build a small arduino controlled over 443Mhz or another
frequency (FM maybe?) in order to switch the nodes on/off.

Without being able to put the devices where you want, you are
constrained by the location of the power supplies.

--
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."