Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Fri, 23 July 2010 12:08 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
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 940DE3A68A2 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.145
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
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 47TZWkS5RV-x for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.166.172.106]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E1503A6407 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 05:08:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.0) with ESMTP id o6NC892V029209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:08:09 +0200
Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o6NC88Me003399; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:08:09 +0200 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.133.173]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id o6NC87RP012682; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:08:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4C498627.5050008@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:08:07 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Henning Rogge <henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
References: <4C2A6BB7.1000900@piuha.net> <AANLkTi=+VixB225byHoA9OHtckZmdP6myLRT+DaGmnwn@mail.gmail.com> <4C495164.4080604@gmail.com> <201007231243.55159.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
In-Reply-To: <201007231243.55159.henning.rogge@fkie.fraunhofer.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org, "Dearlove, Christopher \(UK\)" <Chris.Dearlove@baesystems.com>, Thomas Heide Clausen <thomas@thomasclausen.org>
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)
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/mail-archive/web/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>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:08:18 -0000

Le 23/07/2010 12:43, Henning Rogge a écrit :
> On Fri July 23 2010 10:23:00 Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>> WEll I disagree.  WiFi is designed to use ESSIDs meaningfully, it is in
>> the manual.  WiFi deployments use ESSIDs.  I'd say that one's refusal to
>> use ESSIDs is refusal to abide to the manual, build broken things and
>> then blame IP.
 >
> The typical usage for an 802.11 network in adhoc mode would be to set ALL
> nodes to the same ESSID.

All node in close range - yes.  Nodes further apart could form a 
different subnet.

 > If you don't do so, you have trouble communicating
> with a node which you thought you would have no connection with (and did not
> reserved an ESSID).
>
> Reserving an ESSID for each link of the network will waste a huge amount of
> airtime with beacons.

Well - depends.  In a 50meter area - yes, a single ESSID is good.  It's 
the same area where a subnet can form and have a single ESSID and where 
link-local addresses are visible from each other.

That 50meter is a hard limit specified.

> In some cases it might be even better to switch of
> beacons off completely (ahdemo mode).

Yes, in some cases yes.

Alex

>
> Henning Rogge
>