Performance analysis of mesh architectures

Francis daCosta, bad boy of mesh, is back. Remember the lively debate he triggered last July on the scalability of mesh networks? This time he analyzes the relative performance of competing mesh architectures and shows why the three-radio system provides far better bandwidth distribution than other competing architectures. Naturally, his company, MeshDynamics, sells a three-radio system, but it is still Francis daCosta, bad boy of mesh, is back. Remember the lively debate he triggered last July on the scalability of mesh networks? This time he analyzes the relative performance of competing mesh architectures and shows why the three-radio system provides far better bandwidth distribution than other competing architectures. Naturally, his company, MeshDynamics, sells a three-radio system, but it is still interesting to read what Francis has to say, given that mesh is hot right now among ISPs and systems integrators deploying citywide wireless broadband networks and more of these deployments will take place in densely populated cities.

Francis also explains in his paper why with merely five simultaneous clients per mesh node, both the 1-Radio Ad hoc and the 1+1 Ad hoc mesh architectures cannot provide usable bandwidth beyond 2 hops – and the implications of these limitations.

He presented his ideas at Wi-Fi Planet on December 1 at the “Great Mesh Debate” session. I predicted that the fur would fly at that session, but the participants were remarkably well-behaved and quite civil to one another.

To read “Performance Analysis of Three Competing Mesh Architectures”, click here.

**Please send in your comments either by emailing me or posting them. If you decide to post comments, you will have to sign up with Typekey first — this is my way of avoiding comment spam. To sign up for Typekey, visit http://www.typekey.com/.

Comments

  1. jodie moore says:

    what are the three main disadvantages of the mesh networking topology