<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should FON Use Meraki?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html</link>
	<description>Blog of an entrepreneur</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:44:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Varsavsky</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2760</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Varsavsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2007 13:37:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2760</guid>
		<description>Yes Josh, we will add it.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes Josh, we will add it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josh</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2759</link>
		<dc:creator>josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2007 06:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2759</guid>
		<description>so ....would fon add mesh function in the furture?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>so &#8230;.would fon add mesh function in the furture?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Varsavsky</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2758</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Varsavsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:20:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2758</guid>
		<description>Very interesting Robert. We will contact you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting Robert. We will contact you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Keyes</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2757</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Keyes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2757</guid>
		<description>Well, I&#039;ve come a bit late to the discussion, but better late than never. I was going to suggest some mesh connectivity to Martin but it seems like he&#039;s already talk to Sanjit and knows of Meraki. I know Sanit and some of the other Meraki people as well, as we helped each other out from time to time when the Meraki people were still students at MIT (they are currently listed as &#039;on sabbatical&#039;). I&#039;ve taken the Roofnet software that MIT developed and modified it, as has Meraki, but we&#039;ve diverged in our beliefs in how a mesh network should operate. Meraki believes in having a large number of less powerful mesh nodes, whereas XA believes in having a smaller number of more powerful units. Presently, Meraki and XAMesh (My company, XA Networks, calls our units XAMesh) can interoperate, but the message that Meraki has presented is that they may change their protocols without notification or explanation, and no longer be compatible with the roofnet protocols. Oh well. We too have changed the protocols, but we are committed to backwards compatibility as far as is practical.

It&#039;s true that the mesh nodes on the fringe of the network, far from any gateways to high speed networks (notice I didn&#039;t say &#039;cable modems or DSL&#039;) will suffer some speed limitations. There are various causes for this: some come from the natural wifi signal degradation as it moves through empty space, or is absorbed and reflected by objects. This causes the signal to be weaker, sometimes meaning packets get lost and have to be retransmitted, which causes higher latency and possibly a reduction in throughput (&quot;bandwidth&quot;). Another source of latency is that caused within the mesh node itself, as it does computation and routing. The way that various protocols suffer from bandwidth restriction, latency, and packet loss differs from protocol to protocol. We deal with each protocol separately, in order to present the best user experience (another way we differ from Meraki). I don&#039;t want to get too technical here, but rather to give an introduction how meshing problems can be minimized.

Mesh networks still represent the most cost-effective way of providing wifi Internet coverage on a large area. If the proper mesh technologies can be coupled onto FON, the network would be greatly benefited.

Martin, please contact me in private to discuss some of the specifics. I&#039;d like to work with you and FON. I am already a FON Fan and a &#039;Linus&#039;.

Regards,
Robert Keyes</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I&#8217;ve come a bit late to the discussion, but better late than never. I was going to suggest some mesh connectivity to Martin but it seems like he&#8217;s already talk to Sanjit and knows of Meraki. I know Sanit and some of the other Meraki people as well, as we helped each other out from time to time when the Meraki people were still students at MIT (they are currently listed as &#8216;on sabbatical&#8217;). I&#8217;ve taken the Roofnet software that MIT developed and modified it, as has Meraki, but we&#8217;ve diverged in our beliefs in how a mesh network should operate. Meraki believes in having a large number of less powerful mesh nodes, whereas XA believes in having a smaller number of more powerful units. Presently, Meraki and XAMesh (My company, XA Networks, calls our units XAMesh) can interoperate, but the message that Meraki has presented is that they may change their protocols without notification or explanation, and no longer be compatible with the roofnet protocols. Oh well. We too have changed the protocols, but we are committed to backwards compatibility as far as is practical.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s true that the mesh nodes on the fringe of the network, far from any gateways to high speed networks (notice I didn&#8217;t say &#8216;cable modems or DSL&#8217;) will suffer some speed limitations. There are various causes for this: some come from the natural wifi signal degradation as it moves through empty space, or is absorbed and reflected by objects. This causes the signal to be weaker, sometimes meaning packets get lost and have to be retransmitted, which causes higher latency and possibly a reduction in throughput (&#8220;bandwidth&#8221;). Another source of latency is that caused within the mesh node itself, as it does computation and routing. The way that various protocols suffer from bandwidth restriction, latency, and packet loss differs from protocol to protocol. We deal with each protocol separately, in order to present the best user experience (another way we differ from Meraki). I don&#8217;t want to get too technical here, but rather to give an introduction how meshing problems can be minimized.</p>
<p>Mesh networks still represent the most cost-effective way of providing wifi Internet coverage on a large area. If the proper mesh technologies can be coupled onto FON, the network would be greatly benefited.</p>
<p>Martin, please contact me in private to discuss some of the specifics. I&#8217;d like to work with you and FON. I am already a FON Fan and a &#8216;Linus&#8217;.</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Robert Keyes</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: otilie</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2756</link>
		<dc:creator>otilie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 09:38:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2756</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the inspiration. Nice and useful site.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the inspiration. Nice and useful site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Varsavsky</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2755</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Varsavsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2755</guid>
		<description>Alex, I totally agree on your comment. This is a feature that is on our roadmap. We still need to get around some technical issues for this implementation to work on la Fonera firmware but we will definatelly add this to our Firmware.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alex, I totally agree on your comment. This is a feature that is on our roadmap. We still need to get around some technical issues for this implementation to work on la Fonera firmware but we will definatelly add this to our Firmware.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex Mayorga Adame</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2754</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Mayorga Adame</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2754</guid>
		<description>Martin,

Just in case you don&#039;t check the FON English blog.

Here&#039;s one idea, not meshing exactly, but I&#039;d like you to consider it.

Have you thought of doing the following:

- Make La Fonera work as a repeater
* one SSID plugs to my current private WLAN
* second SSID does the FON_ thing
* the kicker, let me plug my xbox/xbmc/slingbox/htpc and connect to my private WLAN trough the Ethernet port.

I believe this is an everybody win approach, because of the following:
- If placed in my living room, chances are La Fonera would be closer to a window/patio/[front&#124;back]yard and therefore a public area than if it&#039;s located in a basement/attic and therefore linus/aliens get better reception.
- The fonero gets to plug non Wi-Fi enabled gadgets in the living room.
- La Fonera has less chances of getting bricked when following this guide &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/La_Fonera_Flashing&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/La_Fonera_Flashing&lt;/a&gt;

Let me know if you plan to implement this or if this is readily doable with plain Fonera firmware so I can refrain from hacking my way around the coming weekend.

My 2¢</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Martin,</p>
<p>Just in case you don&#8217;t check the FON English blog.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s one idea, not meshing exactly, but I&#8217;d like you to consider it.</p>
<p>Have you thought of doing the following:</p>
<p>- Make La Fonera work as a repeater<br />
* one SSID plugs to my current private WLAN<br />
* second SSID does the FON_ thing<br />
* the kicker, let me plug my xbox/xbmc/slingbox/htpc and connect to my private WLAN trough the Ethernet port.</p>
<p>I believe this is an everybody win approach, because of the following:<br />
- If placed in my living room, chances are La Fonera would be closer to a window/patio/[front|back]yard and therefore a public area than if it&#8217;s located in a basement/attic and therefore linus/aliens get better reception.<br />
- The fonero gets to plug non Wi-Fi enabled gadgets in the living room.<br />
- La Fonera has less chances of getting bricked when following this guide <a href="http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/La_Fonera_Flashing" rel="nofollow">http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/La_Fonera_Flashing</a></p>
<p>Let me know if you plan to implement this or if this is readily doable with plain Fonera firmware so I can refrain from hacking my way around the coming weekend.</p>
<p>My 2¢</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Varsavsky</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2753</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Varsavsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:39:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2753</guid>
		<description>Juergen, 

We will do our best to work with Meraki.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Juergen, </p>
<p>We will do our best to work with Meraki.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Varsavsky</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2752</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Varsavsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:35:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2752</guid>
		<description>Mmemeteau, 

we love meshing but we believe that only in a very dense and localized scenario the Fonero will take advantage of meshing. On the other hand meshing algorithmic are costly on CPU and data traffic, if they are used on environments where it is not adequate it will definitely affect the AP overall performance. But again, we are considering to use meshing at some point, maybe for specific deployments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mmemeteau, </p>
<p>we love meshing but we believe that only in a very dense and localized scenario the Fonero will take advantage of meshing. On the other hand meshing algorithmic are costly on CPU and data traffic, if they are used on environments where it is not adequate it will definitely affect the AP overall performance. But again, we are considering to use meshing at some point, maybe for specific deployments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: juergen</title>
		<link>http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/fon/should-fon-use-meraki.html#comment-2751</link>
		<dc:creator>juergen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.1.2/en/?p=700#comment-2751</guid>
		<description>Hi Martin - 
in my eyes Meraki is really cool and it would fit perfect to FON. But as the biggest Wifi community in the world - FON - should use the potential of Meraki especially in areas where FON is not so present. If you want to make money out of it by milking you Wifi - Meraki has a better payment method. It&#039;s up to you how much you&#039;re going to charge the users... and because of this reason it makes it somewhat rival to FON. 
Some people want to make out some money by sharing the Wifi connection - and some of them don&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Martin &#8211;<br />
in my eyes Meraki is really cool and it would fit perfect to FON. But as the biggest Wifi community in the world &#8211; FON &#8211; should use the potential of Meraki especially in areas where FON is not so present. If you want to make money out of it by milking you Wifi &#8211; Meraki has a better payment method. It&#8217;s up to you how much you&#8217;re going to charge the users&#8230; and because of this reason it makes it somewhat rival to FON.<br />
Some people want to make out some money by sharing the Wifi connection &#8211; and some of them don&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

