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

"Teco Boot" <teco@inf-net.nl> Sun, 21 December 2008 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <autoconf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: autoconf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-autoconf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169ED3A6902; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:59:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32553A6902 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:59:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.552
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.552 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.806, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, MANGLED_PILL=2.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id a-gfzjW90kRj for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:59:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpsmtpo-eml01.kpnxchange.com (cpsmtpo-eml01.KPNXCHANGE.COM [213.75.38.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5B23A67C0 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Dec 2008 03:59:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpsmtp-eml103.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.84.103]) by cpsmtpo-eml01.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:59:45 +0100
Received: from M90Teco ([86.83.9.22]) by cpsmtp-eml103.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:59:44 +0100
From: Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl>
To: "'Charles E. Perkins'" <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>, 'Seung Yi' <scicarus@iname.com>
References: <be8c8d780812190119r200efceawef79c63766ea1a3f@mail.gmail.com> <af6d5faa0812201648p291bd896nc0af69d73a62c922@mail.gmail.com> <494D9768.3040903@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <494D9768.3040903@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:59:41 +0100
Message-ID: <000d01c96363$9b42fae0$d1c8f0a0$@nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcljCQQEI1l85BCxRNGC6HF2Cm+ZdwAWcfag
Content-Language: nl
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2008 11:59:44.0684 (UTC) FILETIME=[9D2FD6C0:01C96363]
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] aspects of multi-hop wireless communication
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org

What about a small adjustment:

   Second, there is no guarantee that two given routers within S can
   directly communicate with one another.  In other words, even though
   two routers R1 and R2 have symmetric communication with router A, there
is
   no guarantee that R1 can hear packets from R2, and there is likewise
   no guarantee that R2 can hear packets from R1.  Thus, multi-hop ad
   hoc wireless communications may be "non-transitive".  Such non-
   transitivity is often observed on multi-hop ad hoc wireless networks,
   due to well-known properties of wireless communication.


Now it says: "If R1->A and A->R2, there is no guarantee for R1->R2".
And the second behavior is not mixed up with the first one.

Teco.

|-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
|Van: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] Namens
|Charles E. Perkins
|Verzonden: zondag 21 december 2008 2:10
|Aan: Seung Yi
|CC: autoconf@ietf.org
|Onderwerp: Re: [Autoconf] aspects of multi-hop wireless communication
|
|
|Hello Seung,
|
|Yes, of course you are right (embarrassment).
|
|What is a good name for the property under discussion?
|
|Regards,
|Charlie P.
|
|
|Seung Yi wrote:
|> Just one simple comment unrelated to the ongoing interesting
|discussion threads.
|>
|> Isn't the definition of transitivity "If A->B and B->C, then A->C"?
|> This document seems to use the term to mean "if A->B and A->C, then
|> B->C" in Section 2, second point.
|>
|> - Seung
|>
|> 2008/12/19 Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>:
|>
|>> Hi all,
|>> here's a draft that aims at describing important aspects of multi-hop
|>> wireless communication, as observed over the past decade of
|experience with
|>> such networks.
|>> The goal of this document is to identify a consensus about this
|topic, and
|>> then use this to move on quicker with the working group documents.
|>>
|>> Please review it, and provide feedback as soon as possible.
|>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baccelli-multi-hop-wireless-
|communication-00
|>>
|>> cheers
|>> Emmanuel
|>> _______________________________________________
|>> Autoconf mailing list
|>> Autoconf@ietf.org
|>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
|>>
|>>
|>>
|> _______________________________________________
|> Autoconf mailing list
|> Autoconf@ietf.org
|> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
|>
|>
|>
|
|_______________________________________________
|Autoconf mailing list
|Autoconf@ietf.org
|https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf