From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.taht.net (mail.taht.net [176.58.107.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9F6F3B29E for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 14:02:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from dancer.taht.net (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:1536:86f0:eea8:6bff:fefe:9a2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.taht.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 577E121461; Tue, 11 Dec 2018 19:02:34 +0000 (UTC) From: Dave Taht To: "David P. Reed" Cc: =?utf-8?B?VG9rZSBIw4PCuGlsYW5kLUrDg8K4cmdlbnNlbg==?= , "cerowrt-devel" References: <1544408591.74276247@apps.rackspace.com> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:02:19 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1544408591.74276247@apps.rackspace.com> (David P. Reed's message of "Sun, 9 Dec 2018 21:23:11 -0500 (EST)") Message-ID: <87tvjjga4k.fsf@taht.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] dlte X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 19:02:35 -0000 "David P. Reed" writes: > Conquer the spectrum licensing and device certification nexus. Or else > your cell is will pwn yr physical world. > > LTE over UNII band is not even as good as CSMA at sharing and > cooperation, and without coordination at installation planning time, > it doesn't work well. > > 802.11ax has the same fragility in Multi Unit Dwellings due to > requiring a radio propagation plan and coordination so neighbors don't > completely jam neighbors. I have not been tracking ax well of late. I had heard they were doing smarter things with smaller channels, which gave me hope.=20 > > Don't obsess about throughput at the link layer, when the design > assumes exclusive rights to transmit. Given how hard it has been to get a mere lte dongle to work right, I am inclined to disregard a lot of the 5G hype.=20 > There are techniques for cooperative space-time-rate multiplexing that > scale. LTE licensed or unlicensed or 802.11ax are not such techniques. > > Small cells are a fantasy of the carriers that they can put their > licensed gear on your property at points they choose. Technically it > appears to work in an abstract fantasy prototype. In the real world, > it can't scale unless you let the phone company invade your premises > and control all your placement of furniture, doors, mirrors, etc. Well, I kind of envision that happening, unless we make wifi work really really well again. I loved learning about low-e glass recently, I think that is going to interfere with celluar, and make wifi deployments better. > ----Original Message----- > From: "Toke H=C3=83=C2=B8iland-J=C3=83=C2=B8rgensen" > Sent: Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:08 am > To: "Dave Taht" > Cc: "Dave Taht" , "cerowrt-devel" > > Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] dlte > > Dave Taht writes: > >> Toke H=C3=83=C2=B8iland-J=C3=83=C2=B8rgensen writes: >> >>> Mikael Abrahamsson writes: >>> >>>> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Dave Taht wrote: >>>> >>>>> I expect dave reed to comment, so I'll withhold mine for now >>>>> >>>>> https://kurti.sh/pubs/dLTE-Johnson-HotNets-2018.pdf >>>> >>>> When I read the first page I was hopeful, then unfortunately I got >>>> disappointed and just quickly scanned the rest. It's still >>>> tunneled and >>>> the same architecture, just more distributed. >>> >>> OK, now I read the paper, and I think you may have missed the part >>> where >>> they say that they terminate the tunnelling at the AP and assign >>> new IPs >>> whenever a client roams. So it's basically WiFi APs over the LTE >>> layer-2... Which is pretty cool, I think :) >> >> It's still based on the false optimism that users will ever get to >> own >> and control their own LTE AP. > > Well, they did say they had done proof of concept tests; and that they > could build a base station for $8000... So might not be completely > impossible... > > -Toke > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel