Edited by author 02-12-2004 04:25 AM
Interesting post, Wayland. We should chat!

Meanwhile, here's another mesh or two to talk about. Isn't that "standards body" discussion due around now?

Guy,

Thanks for yet another very interesting article. It seems that the best wireless network are run on a small practical basis. The large centralized and heavily invested method seems to get bogged down. What Locust Mesh has over just using Access Points and repeating Access Points is that it encourages more nodes to become Access Points on a losely planned if not simply oportunistic expansion.

We run a more formal WISP with planned Access Points which control our subscribers access using their MAC address. With Mesh our network could have been larger with less distance between the subscriber and their nearest Access Point. The effect of this is to allow cheap £20 USB WiFi kit to be plugged in giving an instant 2Mbit bandwidth for £15 per month.

Thinking of Wireless this way make it clear that mobile computing could work anywhere very soon and that ADSL is not so great as people once thought.

A WISP offering a subscription which will work on all wireless networks (perhaps including peoples home wirless network) would be as important as through ticketing on trains. Any WISP whowants to make a bit of extra cash would add this service to their network. VPN would ensure that this traffic passed above and invisible the local IP traffic ensuring privicy between the two. This way you could let someone onto your wireless network with out actually letting them into your network.

Regards,
Wayland Sothcott

www.countybroadband.co.uk

When I asked Jon Anderson - inventor of the LocustWorld Meshbox - what he thought of the collapse of Radiant Networks and MeshWorks, his first response was "All the more for us!"

But in fact, I suspect that the similarity between the two products was limited to the four letters in the word "mesh" - I certainly can't see it affecting Locustworld.

Unless someone knows something I've missed?