[Testing] first play with new XO 1.5 machines

Martin Langhoff martin.langhoff at gmail.com
Thu Oct 22 03:41:22 EDT 2009

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Daniel Drake <dsd at laptop.org> wrote:
> We already discussed this a lot in another thread. It should not be
> automatic. The thread is titled "[Sugar-devel] [Design] Ad-hoc
> networks - New Icons"

Yep -- I did read that thread, way back.

> In ad-hoc, there is just one beacon master. Due to cheap radios and
> interference etc, the beacon master will switch around frequently

So there is a scheme for beacon master-y to switch around? If it works
in practice -- that actually may do the right thing.

> 2. This kind of situation will happen frequently:
> A <-----> B <-----> C
> B can see both users A and C on his network view. A can only see B,
> and C can only see B.
> B shares an activity. Both A and C join. However, anything done by A
> cannot be seen by C and vice-versa, because they are too far apart.

Ok, but if they are close enough it will work. The question is: if we
tell all our nodes to use the same ESSID (or a set of 3 ESSIDs, one
per freq), will independently created networks join and split
reasonably well?

> Ad-hoc will work well for the cases where the children get together in
> a small space and explicitly create a throwaway network.

The "small space" works with younger kids. The "explicitly create"... doesn't.


If we wanted the unreliable mesh instead of the unreliable ad-hoc...

On F11-XO-1.5 we are lacking
 - 802.11s driver/firmware (which could be sub'd by open80211s)
 - NM support (does it play ball w open80211s?)
 - Sugar support.

For F-11 on XO-1
 - NM support
 - Sugar support

Would that be correct?


 martin.langhoff at gmail.com
 martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff

More information about the Devel mailing list