Message: 1
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 15:33:41 -0800
From: Bill Vodall <wa7nwp(a)gmail.com>
To: AMPRNet working group <44net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu>
Subject: Re: [44net] 44Net Digest, Vol 3, Issue 19
<snip>
BBHN (Broadband hamnet, was HSMM) is generally more
interested with
connectivity than performance. Unfortunately too many experimenters
there are new and not familiar with the lessons of 145.01 or 144.39...
Even implemented with good RF design the MESH ad-hoc based system has
compromises. I tried streaming the next episode of Torchwood from
Amazon a couple nights ago and my NW-MESH (based on HSMM-MESH) home
system wouldn't do it. I don't think that's even HD. :(
Here in Green Bay, WI a few of us have been messing with point to
point 802.11 since 1999. Sadly there isn't enough interest (mostly
due to the average ham club members age I suspect), for it to advance
much beyond that... so far.
Although I have finally pulled some strings for commercial tower space
come spring. Without one end up high (above the average 100 foot
trees), you need amplifiers to go anywhere, or a MESH node every
couple miles?
So far I have not done anything with Mesh, and it sort of makes sense
for the distance/propagation delima.. Till I think, wait a second,
802.11 is still half duplex, so when you make a (metric) hop using a
mesh topology, aren't you effectively cutting your bandwidth in half?
So there is more to this than throw a bunch of nodes out there.
(bandwidth and hidden transmitter stuff), there is just no easy way
around a decently designed network.. backbones! Then there is the oh,
well we want to expand the network this way (something not in the
original plan), and how to make the subnet and routes all work, short
of re-addressing everything.
I watched the HamWAN DCC video.. and I have often thought about 5 GHz
Mikrotik Groove as they way I'd go if I were to invest in equipment
again. More so, if bouncing off say a water tower actually is doable.
Steve, KB9MWR