Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #2: Technologies employed
Mitar <mmitar@gmail.com> Thu, 14 April 2016 18:22 UTC
Return-Path: <mmitar@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EEDD12DCD8 for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W-YPXI6k_UrC for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x241.google.com (mail-io0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F2B212DCB7 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x241.google.com with SMTP id z133so12096412iod.1 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=wAAq0Mr4fWXWdgzzvm9lu6hZTLUzhfPeZYGMQefTXk0=; b=WRGrR0Wy60ahbQbgXo/AgiPMdnMVVqLuPPtWDZLMWvULXsToXafJ4w0gXDwwYI9TK7 cOHqtM9/aa6fkrIfcnSsEqwPvcP0h5hY/KDVPITfC0J82fSnPxno1HGFDx5hZPNgspag vUS8imnvbfEbZl5d2az9yHzY65JXGleYLvc7N4byyiA7m0RIYMqN/zPaSGlU1ATKivWg bxNWg1tmRu9EOGBRHocecIv3IZPU432rOc+8Qkazkuynv6uMBphwJV9ZS7lUQGlf1M1G m6azevh9nTdw3ITky0AEfJ1yZjfW0IsKDMjPbnBWR2PoVUkEZa4GTeLvQm2EcqE7eu4W 4Ncg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=wAAq0Mr4fWXWdgzzvm9lu6hZTLUzhfPeZYGMQefTXk0=; b=f4TptF1BUjftSZ5LK1zbiEqkTrzMAe3w6o9Sq+hs5LqJELETcfpZp/GnvIPHUMaA66 syzdmsnCby4z2X5ROINaj5L0MOywiJwShDJ1Q8yKIly7XNyX9GuzVHM/Xdzqx5noviuj XjzgA5a9YFsOrh+g3GgpbZ+nv399+jXP+K4mshYksUxLq/H2tBLISXPwo36e5qxMFG7y 2UUqm10d+FHTjtWogfMqYVt6R6Cas6MewjWjLxaM1lVmKGXxfrxtDNjo6U89cUBGr6+4 b8N8gvAnFKQsAorDm0V5ughmkoSOvXalUBasl8oaadGQs0nhMSBjTVZEAAKADJFuRCxe dn6A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVCUXhrqQlj+UTAmESJjrsMgTc6T1jXhE63uoMqA5/qCV1uj5Qeq/QSZw4ZLK+81YZtH1SjSvNPWlwRKQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.134.8 with SMTP id i8mr17349423iod.130.1460658153830; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.146.131 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <005801d194c5$2f46eae0$8dd4c0a0$@unizar.es>
References: <005801d194c5$2f46eae0$8dd4c0a0$@unizar.es>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 11:22:33 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKLmikMNozNw-vxkbY1AYjHFh6p_8HiFYp+75zZvE3HWe-aKbA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mitar <mmitar@gmail.com>
To: Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gaia/53W6IgDYt1b82s9uOuJWOd6LEKs>
Cc: gaia <gaia@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #2: Technologies employed
X-BeenThere: gaia@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Global Access to the Internet for All <gaia.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gaia/>
List-Post: <mailto:gaia@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:22:36 -0000
Hi! On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote: >> Isn't this section about list of technologies? Why are those villages > mentioned? >> Optical systems can also be used elsewhere. > > It is just an example of an alternative network using wired technologies. I know. What I am saying is that this is not the place to mention this. We should just be listing technologies in this section. And then under particular type of the network which is using this technology we mention the technology and explain in which situation it has been used (in villages). > Is this technology being used in any Alternative Network deployment? If so, > please provide a reference so we can include it in the document. This is one blog post talking about this use case: http://irnas.eu/koruza/2016/04/14/wireless-optical-test-network-koruza Mitar -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m