[MLB-WIRELESS] DNS, DHCP, static ip...

[Longmuir, Brad]

I think 'Monster' is an under-statement.  IP allocation also comes down to a
node network design.  Some people would only need a single IP for a PC that
is directly connected others will need a subnet for their local network plus
an subnet for each wireless connection they have.  I think a suggested
network set-up for a node depending on hardware would be good.

As for dynamic routing RIP v1, noway as it's classless.  RIPv2 has a max of
16 hops which is gunna run out.  OSPF would look like the simplest solution.
Would need to assign IP subnets based on area to utilise route summarisation
otherwise the tables could get huge(although that might be a ways in the
future).  

I lot of work early could save a heap of stress later on when groups of
nodes start to interconnect.

Brad Longmuir


-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Haigh [mailto:netwiz at optushome.com.au]
Sent: Monday, 19 November 2001 12:25 PM
To: melbwireless at melbwireless.dyndns.org
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] DNS, DHCP, static ip...


it gets a bit hard to allocate IP's at the moment... mainly due to routing
concerns... how do we route effectively on such an ad-hoc network? some
people have mentioned using RIP or similar to automate routing propagation -
something to which I am not familiar with - so I can't comment on..

Anyone have any suggestions? comments? routing systems? something to give us
a bit of headway into this 'monster'?

Signed,
Steven Haigh

Out the 100Base-T, off the firewall, through the router, down the T1,
over the leased line, off the bridge, nothing but Net.

The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Drew" <drew at no6.com>
To: <melbwireless at melbwireless.dyndns.org>
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [MLB-WIRELESS] DNS, DHCP, static ip...


> I see a lot of problems occuring with that scheme... I think it would be
> better to do the area descriptions in the hostnames... ie.
> x.suburb.mlbwire.wan or another idea from the seattle wireless group...
> http://seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/DnsProposal  Although i think their
> hostnames are a bit too long... I'd like to see nodeid.suburb.mwn
> (melbourne wireless network) myself.
>
> yeah the allocation is vague, because it hasn't really been decided on.
> if we can come to an agreement we can start implementing it. Steve?
>
> d
>
> Matthew Boyd wrote:
>
> >Heyas,
> >I read the rfc again (maybe a link from the main page would be a good
> >idea?).
> >Maybe we can incorporate the postcode of the suburb into the ip of each
> >node?
> >eg 10.30.66.x for Collingwood, if theres more than one node in a suburb
> >then just go to 31 or 32, this way when we get more nodes you could get
> >an idea of how far away nodes are from you and (possibly) why the ping
> >times for quake are so bad, when it gets up and running.
> >
> >Excuse me if this sounds lame or if theres something I'm missing here.
> >The RFC was a bit vague on the allocation bit.
> >
> >Matt
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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

--
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