From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
From: Marek Lindner <lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 18:42:08 +0800
References: <871vkbzd6s.fsf@trurl.pps.jussieu.fr>
In-Reply-To: <871vkbzd6s.fsf@trurl.pps.jussieu.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200911071842.08599.lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] A peer-reviewed assessment of OLSR,
	BATMAN and Babel
Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.net>
List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.net/mm/options/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.open-mesh.net/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n>
List-Post: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.net>
List-Help: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.net/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.net?subject=subscribe>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.net
Cc: olsr-users@lists.olsr.org, jerryw@uow.edu.au, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.jussieu.fr>, babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org, brett_hagelstein@uow.edu.au, mehrana@uow.edu.au

On Saturday 07 November 2009 03:05:31 Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> I've just come upon an interesting paper that experimentally compares
> the performance of OLSR, BATMAN and Babel.
> 
>     Real-world Performance of Current Proactive Multi-hop Mesh
>     Protocols.  M. Abolhasan, B. Hagelstein, J. C.-P. Wang.
> 
>    
>  http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1747&context=infopapers

Very interesting analysis - thanks for sharing this with us.


> 4. They ran the routing daemons with the default parameters.  This means
>    that BATMAN ran with an OGM interval of 1 second, while Babel used
>    a Hello interval of 4 seconds.  It would have been interesting to see
>    the results with similar parameters.

Although I get your point, you probably share my belief in default options, 
hence it is the right thing to compare. Useful defaults are the first step 
towards a working protocol.  ;)

Cheers,
Marek

PS: You might or might have not noticed that our list now is open for everyone 
to post (without prior registration).