[MLB-WIRELESS] What do people want to do with the wireless connection?

[Giles Pollock]

I noticed when i used bridging from the li à  nux kernel in my home lan that atraffic destined for the computer acting as the bridge was not re broadcasted 
by the other interfaces in the bridge...

Also, whats going to happen with IP allocations for those hooking up to the 
main WAN? is it going to be static or dynamic and are there going to be name 
servers for those who dont like typing in ips to their web browsers to access 
other people on the WAN? static ips would be useful for people who wanted to 
run servers with domain names (say for example, instead of using 
http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx to access a server, have http://wireless.blah.vic or 
something like that). Would we be using private network ips? (192.168.xxx.xxx) 
or public ones? I think either way we would need someone to run a central 
server to act as DNS/DHCP server

(Anyone know of an ip block we could use?)

At 07:18 PM 11/12/01 +1100, you wrote:
To go the routed route, so to speak would each node have to enable 
routeing / install software to do this? If so, is this available for 
all the various platforms that will be running?

What are we going to need to do this? static IP's? DNS? DHCP? (I don't 
really know what all those things mean, I'm just throwing acronyms 
around for the hell of it) some sort of centralised server to manage 
everybody?


Matt

----- Original Message -----
From: Jason Hecker <jason at air.net.au>
Date: Monday, November 12, 2001 1:06 pm
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] What do people want to do with the wireless 
connection?

>
> >that's the general idea... bridged - not quite - hopefully it
> will be routed
> >to try and cut down on "useless" traffic...
>
> Indeed.  What would be nice is if the nodes talked to each other
> automatically and configured routes based on who they can detect
> and get
> information from other nodes on what their routes are.  Secondly,
> power
> tests would be conducted automatically too so that the transmit
> power is
> set to a level that is necessary to talk to the next hop, thereby
> reducing
> the overall noise floor.  The latter is a bit fanciful, but the
> former
> would be workable.  Like I said, the RIPv2 protocol can help with
> this,
> methinks.  If lots of people get this up and running, combined
> with the
> noise from other private business wireless LANs and Bluetooth and
> dodgy
> microwave ovens, this whole neighborhood wireless caper may end up
> being
> less than reliable.  My main concern is that people will be
> expecting wired
> LAN type performance (a la 10Mbit).  Congestion will also be of
> concern,
> especially if en masse DivX transfers start to interfere with low
> latency
> required gaming packets.
>
> I just hope a lot of punters don't have too high a watermark set
> for the
> performance of their Wireless LAN.
>
> jASON


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at melbwireless.dyndns.org with a subject 
of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: 
http://melbwireless.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at melbwireless.dyndns.org with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://melbwireless.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless