RE: [tracker2] Re: timeslotting
- I've done some research on mobile ad-hoc mesh networks, and nothing I've seen so far really covers the quirks of APRS. In particular:1. Really bad hidden-transmitter problems and asymmetric links2. Low data rates3. Extremely mobile nodes and dynamic network topologyThe protocols generally assume that if station A can hear station B, then B can hear A. With APRS, very often a node won't be in direct contact with ANY nodes, except for the WIDE digis. Most of these protocols are also much faster than APRS, and can tolerate a much higher level of coordination traffic. If APRS is going to do any sort of active channel access coordination, it's going to have to be done with very little added overhead. Ad-hoc mesh networks also tend to assume a fairly static configuration, where topology changes are an exception rather than the norm.Scott
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Chris Kantarjiev
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 7:05 AM
Subject: [tracker2] Re: timeslotting
> THEN we've got to figure out how to implement self-organizing timeslotting,
> like AIS.
I've never looked at it at all, but I wonder if one of the self-organizing
mesh networking protocols would be helpful here. Meraki is a for-profit
implementation of work that was done at MIT, and I'm pretty sure that
the original work was open source...