What's the real scope of hardware openness?

Luca Dionisi luca.dionisi at gmail.com
Tue Aug 7 18:37:39 CEST 2007

On 8/7/07, John Seghers <jseghers at cequint.com> wrote:
> Luca Dionisi wrote:
> >
> > Many NEOs -> many batteries.
> > Few NEOs -> few power need.
> > Scaleable, isn't it?
> >
> > I know I'm simplifying.  I'm not saying it's trivial.
> The main problem here is that the WiFi hardware was not designed for the
> ultra-low-power modes required to extend the "standby" time.  Note how most
> phones today can go for days without recharging while waiting for a call,
> but get only a few hours of talk time.
> GSM and CDMA radio systems are designed to use an absolute minimum of power
> when in standby. They broadcast location occasionally, but most of the time
> they are just listening--and listening only to the "housekeeping" channel.
> In a mesh network using WiFi, however, the nodes need to be active any time
> they are being used for data transfer.  Even topological negotiation is
> going to require data transfer.
> > E.g. the previously mentioned link says:
> > Netsukuku is designed to handle an unlimited number of nodes with minimal
> > CPU and memory resources.
> Unfortunately this doesn't say anything about power requirements.
> - John

John, thanks a lot for the light. Now I see.
Sad. I will step back and think.

More information about the community mailing list