Talk:Wireless mesh network

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meter Applications[edit]

The line mentioning "smart meter" applications noted the need for a reference. This might not be the best one, but see here: http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/article_427.html Describes a leading manufacturer of Smart Meters using RF mesh networks in its "OpenWay" line of SmartMeters: "OpenWay® uses an adaptive-tree/mesh network RF technology for local area communications and any Internet standards-based network for the wide-area communications."

General[edit]

Ok The very first line doesn't make sense because mesh topology is not defined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.151.139.234 (talk) 03:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some description to include a definition of mesh clients, mesh routers and gateways to try and help define the wireless mesh network a little more clearly Ernstjason (talk) 18:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the feel of this page however some of my work was not properly referenced. I'm not a spammer nor am I selling something however reference to my work should be at least be put in the reference. Thanks DA Moskaluk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.151.139.234 (talk) 13:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The example protocol solution has now been removed. The author of that section is encouraged to write wiki page for this, I am not sure what solution is being referred to. Further biased or non encyclopedic statements have been removed. Please check if I have missed something, or if I have mistakingly added some bias myself. (Lanilsson (talk) 01:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I have written up the main section and have removed some incorrect statements. I think that this section is now ok, but the architecture described in the introduction needs to be moved into a separate article. Lanilsson (talk) 21:55, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page is in need of a some serious reorganization. Most of the text in this does NOT describe a generic wireless mesh network, but one very specific solution. I think this text quite well written, but does not represent a generic or typical mesh solution. It should be moved into a separate article called whatever this solution is called. I am open for any suggestion on how to resolve this. Lanilsson (talk) 21:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK so I updated the Architecture to describe what it is and left in the 3 items. The items make sense to someone but I don't see the relevance to the article. I left in for now may someone else can address it. Thanks DAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.186.167.6 (talk) 20:22, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Architecture section this way off. I added a hyperlink to my topology page describing different wireless mesh [edit] Architecture. The link should stay until this can be rewritten in order to reflect the various type of topology and architecture of wireless mesh. If there is a better hyperlink out there it should be used. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAMoskaluk (talk • contribs) 15:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sorta added a description of how mesh networking works. I thought it would require a bit more explanation of how each nodes works. I tried to make it as generic as possible. The key here is how the nodes form together to create a wireless mesh network. Hopefully we can get some one to create additional illustrations. Prefered is to show that Mesh Network nodes should be place in triangle arrangement. Thanks DAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAMoskaluk (talk • contribs) 15:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One More comment regarding "Mesh Networking" is very similar to this page; however, it doesn't cover wired mesh networking and two are different. Mesh Networking in general should a description and Wireless Mesh Network should show the difference between the two. I havent' put words to this but it needs to be reviewed. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAMoskaluk (talk • contribs) 21:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the grammar I fix the last line in the sentence to referrence the diagrams. Thanks DAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by DAMoskaluk (talk • contribs) 21:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I've update the definition and a bit of history of wireless mesh. First the definition is more of a description of the charateristics of wireless mesh i.e. it is not a LAN but it has a number of inherient qualities. The second item I tried to give a conceptual view of the technology and how it performs ie describing it as a cloud with destinct boundaries. Further description will be required and was looking for someone to add to the this idea. Next I remove the hog wash that someone tried to describe. It sound too much like a "sales pitch" from a company.

Next I also edit the history. I had a problem with Generation as it seem not distinct enough to describe various radio configuration of wireless mesh. I used the lack of IEEE standard as a first generation of this wireless mesh. As new new technology and radio card are developed such as MIMO and new standards are brought in then I see this as the next generation rather than a configuration of using the same equipment. I tried to take the Branding of a Sales Pitch out of the description.

Further work is required to describe the wireless nodes and their general fuctionality as it relates to operating the network. I try to stay away from wi-fi or any 802.11 X standards. As wireless mesh can work on many types of radio cards. However the popularity of 802.11 is driving the distinctiveness of wireless mesh network.

I left in the diagrams for now, however, they too need to be redone to express how the network works in discovery, failure, and state of rest modes. I look to various open source solution such as AODV, Mobile Network, and comercial operators such as Cisco and Nortel for accurate description of a wireless network.

Further to this section the interlationship of how a node does discovery should also be describe. I hope this helps DAM. 

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.186.167.6 (talk) 20:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freshness of information[edit]

Hello. I am interested in possibly contributing to this article, but I wanted to ask here first to avoid any misunderstandings.

The subject of wireless mesh networking is broad. A group of WiFi enabled computers can form a wireless mesh network or a group of battery powered sensors can form a wireless mesh network. Currently, the example approach to a mesh architecture which is presented in this article is too complex to meet the needs of some embedded applications such as automated meter reading, where node cost and long battery life dictate a set of restrictions that wouldn't be found in the WiFi based example. In other words, there are a host of considerations and approaches that are appropriate for the battery powered mesh network variety but that are not even remotely mentioned in this article.

I would propose to add information related to battery powered, low cost applications and solutions for wireless mesh networks. I believe that many readers of this article would be looking for information related to these sub-topics and would not find that information here. For example, in the application section of the article, the only real application mentioned is VoIP which is probably the least practical of all applications for this technology.

So, unless someone has a problem with my modifying this article to include additional information related to approaches to battery powered, low cost wireless mesh networks, I will go ahead and make my edits.

Also, as a last aside, I know that it is basically taboo to link to commerical products or projects as evidenced by comments on this page. However, for readers interested in learning about commercial, not just academic, solutions which are available, it makes sense to me that there should be links to commercial products or projects if those links offer the reader genuine information that is something more useful than a sales pitch.

I have a user page and a talk page, so you can comment there if you like or here. Either is OK. I am new to Wikipedia, so I accept the fact that I might not fully understand the whole point of these articles.

--23:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)RF Troubleshooter (talk)

Wow ... Seems to be that some companies did spam around all mesh related Wikipedia articles. It's interesting to read how balanced some statements are. Furthermore, the external links are very much related to make a certain company look good.

First who ever rewrote this article doesn't know how to write and the second part is the content is very wrong. Is it possible to revert back to what was written six months ago?

Who is the main editor of this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.151.139.103 (talk) 12:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.48.21.145 (talk) 03:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if it is right to say "the more nodes, the more bandwidth". On a short distance, every nodes communicating are doing it on the same radio channel. It's like having a LAN made of several computers and a HUB - as they are sharing the same carrier, there can be overloads.

My two cents - I'm not a specialist in networking, but I felt that this point should be clarified.

Protocols.[edit]

I thing that is only important to show what is mainline of protocols. And only protocols that are currently on real tests no virtual simulations only protocols.

Like AODV - Ad-hoc On Demand Distance Vector DSR - Dynamic Source Routing OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing protocol) TORA (Temporally-Ordered Routing Algorithm)

The others are to be only in the Ad hoc protocol list

--Suns 22:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subject Matter[edit]

The majority of the article (2nd and 3rd paragraph of introduction) deals with mesh networks in general and not about wireless mesh networks particularly. This information should be moved to the Mesh networking article, and information specific to wireless mesh networks should be put here. --Soumyasch 13:00, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my addition deleted?[edit]

hi!

I am from funkfeuer, a project which is very actively researching into mesh routing and closely cooperating with freifunk (olsr). I wanted to add a link to http://www.funkfeuer.at below the freifunk link and some self acclaimed "wikipedia cleanup" person deleted it. Sorry, but this behaviour basically destroys wikipedia.

My link is not advertisement, we actually do contribute to freifunk, OLSR, we released our own wireless mesh ISP software on sorceforge, we are currently researching into 5GHz multichannel mesh solutions which will be ~ approx as cheap as the linksys.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by AaronKaplan (talk • contribs).

Please see my reply on your talk page. Thanks Nelson50 17:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok , I read your reply and I think you made good points. Now comes the hard point/question for you? Why do you believe that olsrexperiment can be on the link list and funkfeuer can not? There is very little difference, we are working on the same topics and are cross contributing. So. In other words: delete both or leave funkfeuer there please. Otherwise I see no fairness in wikipedia anymore. -- AaronKaplan

OPINION:[edit]

Nelson50 is a pompous fool. If Wikipedia were modeled after his beliefs and actions, it would be a sorry place.. Go ahead and delete this, you'll be just like him.

Hear hear! 72.224.116.112 (talk) 04:13, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss links here[edit]

Editors regularly clean out undiscussed links from this article. Please discuss here if you want a link not to be cleaned out regularly. (You can help!)

I am concerned that some of the external links comprise WP:WPSPAM and "me too" websites that are not notable. This wireless article is by no means alone in this. I'd like to kick of a review and discussion about this with a view towards tidying up the list. Any identified sites could then be removed from other articles, if appropriate. Alternatively, sites already removed could be re-added, if such a consensus emerges.Nelson50 16:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson You are are not objective --AaronKaplan

—The preceding partly signed comment was added by AaronKaplan (talk • contribs). Nelson50 22:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links cleared out today Nelson50 14:49, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

information from this article should me mentioned in this article if round robin article is redirected to this article. article before newest in round robin is most useful... i guess...

Round-robin networks From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Revision as of 04:26, 24 August 2005;

Green Wi-Fi[edit]

I thought of this idea of cheap little mass-produced, solar-powered, weather-proof mesh networking nodes distributed around cities to provide free Internet access and such everywhere (free VoIP calls from Wi-Fi phones to compete with cell networks, etc.)

Someone else had a similar idea for developing nations and started Green WiFi, which is related to the roofnet and $100 laptop projects. This probably deserves its own article.

Another similar idea? — Omegatron 15:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

scalability[edit]

Why mesh won't scale User:Gritzko, 1 Apr 2007

The article currently claims This type of infrastructure can be decentralized (with no central server) for less scalable applications or centrialized controlled for high scalable applications (with a central server). I slapped on the {{dubious}} because it seems intuitively true that the exact opposite is true: There is some limit to the size of the network before the central server becomes overloaded. Right? --68.0.120.35 04:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Centralized solutions are usually considered as less scalable (e.g. a web server cluster vs BitTorrent p2p network). User:Gritzko, 2 May 2007
Hmmm, I'm not sure that it is intuitive. The bittorrent vs. webserver argument is not a valid analogy to this application. You are referring to the difference between providing centralized vs. distributed content. Traffic and access control is already, in sense, centralized in that your ISP and other major internet traffic hubs handle it and you don't just negotiate ad-hoc with all the other users of the internet. Basically you are talking about completely different layers of communications. -Seiph3r 18:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What the article appears to be saying is that a completely wireless, ad-hoc mesh network won't scale without a backbone. The larger it becomes the more nodes it has and the harder it is for the nodes furthest away from each other (most hops) to communicate with each other (as the number of hops increases the information loss increases also). To be scalable wireless mesh must be supported by a series of access points operating in the mesh which are connected to wired backbone. This limits the maximum number of hops as well as the number of users per AP. What the article says makes sense in this context and is demonstrated in some current implementations of Wireless Mesh (see the Colyville Texas project http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_July_1/ai_n14709625, also Richardson, TX is rolling out an even larger project http://www.nortel.com/corporate/news/newsreleases/2005b/05_18_05_richardson_mesh.html).
Remember the concept isn't about having a single wireless server, it is about having a centralized network system to complete the connection between the mesh and wired backbones. In other words the mesh is the 'last-mile' connection but not the entire network on it's own. -Seiph3r 18:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


This type of infrastructure can be decentralized (with no central server) for less scalable applications or centrialized controlled for high scalable applications (with a central server)

The statement above leads me to believe the concept IS about a single wireless server to increase scalability. Perhaps a re wording is in order to remove the server items and talk more about backbone?

The blog entry linked above misses a very important point: most wireless technologies perform link-layer retransmissions. If you have a 10% probability loss, you're not going to have a 95% packet loss rate over 10 hops; you're going to have roughly 0% packet loss, but with an average of 11 transmissions of every packet instead of the expected 10. Look, just because you found it on the web doesn't mean it's true.--Jec 00:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doing 10 retransmissions means that 1/10 of the nominal bandwidth is actually available. Saturation is another cause for packet loss. Gritzko 09:17, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in helping.[edit]

--Fdacosta 21:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC) Am CTO of a wireless mesh networking, have written stuff (articles,book chapters, patent applications) on flavors of wireless mesh networking technology. Would be happy to work on related pages e.g. Wireless_mesh_network.[reply]

Merge[edit]

It seems like shared mesh and switched mesh don't really merit their own pages at this point, and the information would be more usefully presented as part of the main topic here. On the topic of merging, it may also be worth considering a merge of history of wireless mesh networking. ENeville (talk) 00:33, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the typology stubs should be merged here per [1] etc. Someone not using his real name (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?[edit]

Mesh networking 104.172.111.237 (talk) 16:53, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wireless mesh network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"High gain omni-directional antenna"[edit]

This is minor, but the diagram at the top of the article indicates a "High gain omni-directional antenna". There is no such thing. High gain antennas are directional by definition.

Security and privacy[edit]

I think it would increase the value of this article to summarise security and privacy issues. 80.43.28.237 (talk) 04:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wireless_mesh_network&oldid=1217998426"