[Freedombox-discuss] Wireless Mesh Netowrking
Quoting Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi (2015-10-08 14:09:40)
> On 2015-10-08 at 13:25:57 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Do any mesh networking protocol work reliably today without
> > administration at all? Any of those in Debian? With the configuration
> > currently setup by the Debian package?
>
> yes, yes, and yes, sort-of, but not really in an useful way if
> standalone
Great!
> The protocol I know best is batman-adv, and in this case I'm sure that
> it doesn't really require administration after it has been setup and
> it is in Debian.
>
> Configuring it requires adding one simple stanza in
> /etc/network/interfaces which can probably be added by scanning for
> existing network interfaces, so it may be done without user
> intervention.
>
> The reason why this may not really be enought to be useful is that
> this way batman is looking for other batman nodes on the local (layer
> 2) networks it knows about, and providing a network interface which
> talks with them and further nodes, and that's it.
>
> This interface must be configured in a way that is compatible with the
> rest of the network, and there must be a way for the user to reach the
> available services.
>
> This may also happen in a way that doesn't require intervention from
> the user if there is a server elsewhere on the mesh which provides
> ipv6 autoconfiguration data and a DNS, but that one must be configured
> by some human and probably requires administration.
...but if I understand you correctly, I would consider FreedomBox that
node which provides the infrastructural part.
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/attachments/20151008/e498746d/attachment.sig>
Reply to: