49-node Indoor Mesh: Difference between revisions
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
[[Image:Massive-mesh-layout.jpg|thumb]] | [[Image:Massive-mesh-layout.jpg|thumb]] | ||
[[Mobility]] on wireless mesh networks is also a feature that we aim to test. One method of doing this is by using roaming nodes built onto [[Robots]] like the | [[Mobility]] on wireless mesh networks is also a feature that we aim to test. One method of doing this is by using roaming nodes built onto [[Robots]] like the [[Mesh Wanderer]] Lego robot shown in the 2nd picture. Each protocol is generally suited to different scenarios, some scale better to very large meshes due to less broadcast traffic others are better at handling mobility. Once all these metrics are gathered, better protocol choices can be made when a mesh network is built. | ||
[[Image:Robot00001-small.jpg|thumb]] | [[Image:Robot00001-small.jpg|thumb]] | ||
Revision as of 14:44, 20 December 2005
Introduction
Their are a plethora of mesh routing protocols being used worldwide today (See: Wireless Mesh Networking). Some of these have become popular due to organizations taking the trouble to convert the specification into usable code that can be run on a wireless router while other protocols remain purely academic and have only been run on computer simulations. There is also a new 802.11s working group which is seeking to create Mesh Standards. Protocols for which code is available will be run on the massive mesh, indoor testbed, which consists of a grid of 49 nodes (See 1st thumbnail image). Some code will also be ported to run on the massive mesh - for example HSLS is being ported to FreeBSD and Linux. Performance metrics will be gathered such as average throughput and latency together with their variance.
Mobility on wireless mesh networks is also a feature that we aim to test. One method of doing this is by using roaming nodes built onto Robots like the Mesh Wanderer Lego robot shown in the 2nd picture. Each protocol is generally suited to different scenarios, some scale better to very large meshes due to less broadcast traffic others are better at handling mobility. Once all these metrics are gathered, better protocol choices can be made when a mesh network is built.
The 3rd and 4th thumbnail images on the right show two scenarios represented by the OLSR Dot Draw visualization tool. The 3rd image shows mesh configuration with no omni antennas attached, while the 4th image shows mesh configuration with an omni attached to node 44.
Other visualization tools are also being worked on.