Sun Feb 14 16:26:24 CET 2016
from people until the last days.
Also i noticed that people didn't talk and tried to fix the errors found
when trying to run wibed, only 5-6 people where actually working on make
the testbeds ready.
Why if is called battlemesh we talked a lot and forget about meshing?
Il 09/mag/2016 18:02, "nemesis" <nemesis at ninux.org> ha scritto:
At the moment I have the impression that everybody is welcome to run tests
as long as they use wibed, and if they don't, they get attacked.
So I do not really understand your email Christian, do you mean that if
next year we want to participate to the battlemesh we have to use wibed?
Or are we free to run our own tests without being forced to use a system
which many people, who for some reason are not speaking out, find it
It is clear to me that now there are two groups of people: those who want
to run wibed and those who would prefer trying something different.
We either let both participate and try different scenarios, hence getting
even more results, because we can do more tests if we work well, or we
should clarify that the tests need to be performed with a single system,
like wibed, therefore those who don't find it comfortable to work with it
will have to decide if coming just for the talks or not come at all.
On Mon, 9 May 2016 17:53:08 +0200, Christian Huldt <christian at solvare.se>
> Battle of the testbeds has to organize their own event IMHO.
> Battlemesh has always been a very welcoming environment, I think that is
> one reason for the growth, please keep it that way...
> Den 2016-05-09 kl. 17:39, skrev Simon Wunderlich:
>> on which authority is anyone expelling anyone here? I think nobody can a=
>> should get expelled on disagreements on the testbed! I think the
>> discussion is
>> getting a little unprofessional here, looking at Juliusz' statements, wh=
>> wasn't participating WBM in Porto and various other events before.
>> Please, let
>> us keep to the facts, and don't mark anything "fundamentally flawed". I
>> that talking about problems and mistakes is very important to improve,
>> but NOT
>> in a way that anyone should feel expelled.
>> Please, let us talk about the problems and solutions professionally here=
>> us point out problems based on specific occurrences. And lets fix them.
>> Personally I don't care which testbed system is used for next year, and
>> for the people who prepare and perform the tests to decide (which is not
>> And personally I appreciate the effort of everyone helping to make the
>> work, even if we don't have results every time, because even if we don't=
>> as the protocol developers get valuable results. For example, even this
>> we got various valuable bug reports which made us fix problems in BATMAN
>> V. If
>> I heard correctly, it was similar for other protocols as well.
>> Lets stay positive here!
>> On Monday 09 May 2016 17:07:39 Roger Baig Vi=C3=B1as wrote:
>>> Hi and goodbye,
>>> FORTUNATELY the evidences contradict the unfounded statements (the way
>>> of doing science of some academics -together with overlooking the
>>> facts which contradict their theories). In v6, inspired on v5's work,
>>> we presented WiBed and, not only we got test results, but we were
>>> able to present them in figures systematically produced and a full
>>> report was delivered afterwards .
>>> UNFORTUNATELY some individuals insist in expelling people from the WBM
>>> while the community stays quite. Last year was Sven's turn, now it is
>>>  https://github.com/axn/wbm2pdf
>>>  http://ml.ninux.org/pipermail/battlemesh/2015-August/003807.html
>>> My apologises to those who trust me again after last year's farce.
>>> On 9 May 2016 at 15:48, Juliusz Chroboczek
>>> <jch at pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> wrote:
>>>> You still hit the same problems as we had 10 years ago, it takes too
>>>>> much time to get a decent testbed running.
>>>> No, Benjamin, read Federico's mail again.
>>>> Last year, most of the people working on the testbed tried to get wibe=
>>>> work. A small group of people (including Federico), some of which had
>>>> never touched an OpenWRT router before, decided to work in parallel an=
>>>> build a simple testbed that we fully understood. The small group got
>>>> very useful results; the wibed people got none.
>>>> Let us please face it: the notion of a magical testbed that will solve
>>>> world hunger is fundamentally flawed. The basic idea behind wibed is
>>>> fundamentally flawed. Let's take this into account in the future --
>>>> limit ourselves to simple test frameworks that people actually
Battlemesh mailing list
Battlemesh at ml.ninux.org
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
<p dir=3D"ltr">I think that like the operative systems enviroment we can tr=
y different testbeds.<br>
More information about the Battlemesh