From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <mitar@tnode.com>
Message-ID: <4F5B7F44.3000803@tnode.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:20:20 -0800
From: Mitar <mitar@tnode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4F4F6D18.3070403@ninux.org> <20120309085636.GA9018@pandem0nium>
	<20120309111203.GE15059@kerneis.info>
	<201203091926.54899.lindner_marek@yahoo.de>
	<20120309120455.GF15059@kerneis.info>
	<20120309123905.GB436@ritirata.org>
	<20120309125741.GJ15059@kerneis.info>
	<74A4488FAEEC56408507A6FECA6909910122184D@SC000647.CHASCOM.INT>
	<20120309134600.GK15059@kerneis.info>
	<7ilin9voj9.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr>
In-Reply-To: <7ilin9voj9.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [Battlemesh]     Battlemesh v5 tests
Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking
	<b.a.t.m.a.n.lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/options/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.open-mesh.org/pipermail/b.a.t.m.a.n>
List-Post: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.open-mesh.org/mm/listinfo/b.a.t.m.a.n>,
	<mailto:b.a.t.m.a.n-request@lists.open-mesh.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Battle of the Mesh Mailing List <battlemesh@ml.ninux.org>
Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.jussieu.fr>, The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking <b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org>

Hi!

> (In a pure mesh protocol, routers with multiple interfaces should
> probably appear as multiple nodes;

Why? I think it is good that the routing protocol knows that something
(some interfaces) belongs together (node).


Mitar