Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #10 Traffic management
Mitar <mmitar@gmail.com> Wed, 13 April 2016 10:42 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 1C30912E4DC for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:43 -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 RgiwNA9B51lY for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x243.google.com (mail-io0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::243]) (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 1C51612E4D9 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x243.google.com with SMTP id z133so6145763iod.1 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:41 -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=kUUR7lsTzUXMUTvlZLnwitYZNlGUNr0ZhJUKqRhkSfI=; b=soXcy6s1EzWlH36p3r7KOUUNdgKIjUOtTfqE5xPS8VpqDXv/vO9FjchH2s/pp35gdo T2h+SoLBHk4kusSoO/Qc8IMEar1cx0dHuW171j4gUqgaYKRkqWnyRAqJLHxBE6Hboa9V JdSKfPi7bDgJCPCNWr+fBEcfDahzlRiMsoNYSNn8/k/6K7Cq37wQ1DkiD/0WKr+7dMRm aW+dvy/ZipNP/x+3KJ0TSRscXTrb9eQTyoqZGP3++kk8JnH05/MZR47GpR0XPXzDXTQR zAInZmdWHtkFU8r6uDmWy7PZVp7K3Dj9ukNcJ2laouaf/42ovVpMRgFxql5Xr83WuDym +Psg==
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=kUUR7lsTzUXMUTvlZLnwitYZNlGUNr0ZhJUKqRhkSfI=; b=IQ9nznNwyqJiasNDlivithlUVH4W4YKX7OIjkzvqQDNZlNdC8w/wt9I2dKPK/Jxt3B HwvQCR7ZhYSgnH+HzfLRHsHiZRV2z5WvZCfGFq/91rkzOt+ZdEDvAX9kxb8t+e+cYHyd Ol8oYa3b/FWbonu2BI9zoV9b4sveoRuU2BK4zv7qVV390ffIt5hvtIAELdaZWmTOR3Aj BEfS+UysKKQHFqWvguP4ZhQFTzUkdBITYiC6kp4YruE8unbeVRE4lYmkmqqLbL0ZRzTk oIu8+YWp6l1TOKTVKweDqsVh6jQ9y5w9bt4fX8iuuafQTO2qQta6vR6GDXHMifQJXxwC /taA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVHNS4U5WjswxhGjBFveieLDR3pySTvoKQrq/JS8AkuSVJyZ9jRS9GBAl6QHeKr7hFEB3ZLo6hSKlzv5Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.33.7 with SMTP id h7mr9192511ioh.30.1460544160505; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.107.13.76 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <010001d1955f$2ad48ea0$807dabe0$@unizar.es>
References: <010001d1955f$2ad48ea0$807dabe0$@unizar.es>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 03:42:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKLmikOYPfYS_K868uYe3_vA6Kg5hc0cBYDE+pV5JQ=Ne4XwHA@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/leZRVxwR0clL83WdGmwzlTATWtA>
Cc: gaia <gaia@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [gaia] draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments. Mitar review, question #10 Traffic management
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: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:42:43 -0000
Hi! On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote: >> In community networks is also pretty common to run the network itself on > different >> frequencies than the APs. Some first generation mesh networks ran > everything >> (backbone over ad-hoc) and client-serving APs on the same channel, but > with 5 >> GHz spectrum and cheap dual-band devices this is often separated now. > > I think this is interesting. Do you have any reference or example to support > this statement? Hm, this is so common that I am unsure how to reference this. See diagrams here for an example: https://sudoroom.org/wiki/Mesh/Diagrams Mitar -- http://mitar.tnode.com/ https://twitter.com/mitar_m