[Battlemesh] Network configuration and address plan for Battlemesh v9

Dave Taht dave.taht at gmail.com
Tue Aug 11 18:00:33 CEST 2015

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Henning Rogge <hrogge at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke at toke.dk> wrote:
>> Henning Rogge <hrogge at gmail.com> writes:
>>> - ALL IPv4 addresses of the mesh are within a /16 prefix (so we don't
>>> need to push default routes to attached devices and can keep their
>>> Internet connection up)
>> Might I suggest adding IPv6 as well? Or an even more radical suggestion:
>> Do an IPv6-only test! :)
> Yes, I will add IPv6 now that we have resolved the IPv4 issues...
> I will post an update with IPv4 and IPv6 soon.

In laying out the original /21 design for ipv4, I left room for more
conventional prefix (/24) distribution, and more radios.

 One of the things I would like to see tested more fully for the meshy
routing protocols is the more standard AP style multicast, which is
usually, today, distributed on a powersave (250ms) interval.

And it would be cool to be able to test devices with 3 or more radios,
which is increasingly common in the 802.11ac universe, and with things
that also connect to LTE and/or 802.14.

> Henning
> _______________________________________________
> Battlemesh mailing list
> Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
> http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/battlemesh

Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?

More information about the Battlemesh mailing list