Re: [Autoconf] aspects of multi-hop wireless communication

Charles E. Perkins wrote:
> 
> Hello Alex,
> 
> Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> IP is a solution that puts together different links.
>>
>> Yes, provided IP knows what are those links, each one in particular 
>> detail.
> 
> Actually, all that is needed is for IP to have a useful interface to the
> device driver.

I agree.  Device driver interfaces are known for several wireless link 
layers.  I think there isn't one special for the A-B-C hidden terminal 
problem.  I may be wrong, but I think.

>>> If you would like to suggest limiting the applicability of IP to 
>>> _only_ be allowed to work for links with specific characteristics, 
>>> then I think you should be explicit about it.
>>
>> YEs, I'm explicit: it's wifi.
> 
> That restriction is not in the charter.  Do you want to campaign
> for a charter revision?

Right... No, no, I don't want to restrict to wifi.  I think the A-B-C 
hidden terminal problem was mentioned in the wifi context.  I haven't 
seen it elsewhere.

I agree for a solution IP to run over several link layers, for example 
wifi and 802.16.

When a router needs to route between a wifi and a 802.16 link it never 
has the hidden terminal problem.

>>> That's not a question I have raised, nor do I think that the answer
>>> would be illuminating.  But my answer is that no one is making any
>>> such refusal.
>>>
>>> The question is, why can't we use IP as a good tool to solve problems
>>> of connecting together wireless links into a network, even when
>>> bridging solutions are not available?
>>
>> WE need to be able to know over what is IP supposed to run.  If we 
>> don't have a good under-IP then it can't run.  Actually we could think 
>> as much it will run as we think it won't run.  Sorry, I can't be 
>> clearer than that.
> 
> But is does run.  I guess that's also pretty clear.
> 
> I'd like for it to run using standard protocols.
> 
> And not just for WiFi.

Yes, I'd like to help with a protocol for wireless links, like wifi and 
802.16.  But routing between these two doesn't expose the hidden 
terminal problem.  I'm pretty sure about it, I can say that because I 
have experience with IP over wifi and over 802.16 (emulated) links.

Alex

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf