Hi all,
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 07:32:06AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
The problem with broadcasting the ELP packets is that they are always sent with the most robust coding rate. So ELP gives you an idea how good the 1Mbps broadcast channel is, not how good the unicast channel the automatic rate selection algorithm is using is. I think we discussed mixing in some unicast packets in the forward direction. The ELP packets containing the reports would stay the same, and so function as node detection. But a node could also send out unicast ELP packets to its known neighbours and they would be included into the LQ.
I agree with you Andrew, I didn't think about a concept yet, but adding a unicast reply or something like that would help a lot imho. (Actually is this what Babel do?)
There are obvious drawbacks. More overhead, especially in dense networks. It is also not clear if the measurements would be better.
What about having a dynamic advertisement period? Again, I don't have a concept about that, but, if I remember correctly, there is another protocol called Trickle[1] which does something similar. We could take some inspiration.
Cheers,
[1]: http://csl.stanford.edu/~pal/pubs/trickle-nsdi04.pdf