[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Ulrik Lunddahl <ul at proconsult dot dk>
 To:  "m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  SV: SV: SV: [m0n0wall] Increase number of available ip-addresses
 Date:  Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:54:10 +0000
Yes and if you compare how popular and widespread it actually is, it makes no sense why more of the
frequency band has not been allocated to this purpose, but this is whole other discussion.

A broadcast is far more effective compared to send the same information to every client, as long as
they share the same medium, so being able to use broadcasts for something is actually good for the
medium... and bad for battery life from a client perspective, it's all a compromise, and it's never
really simple.


- Ulrik

-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Lee Sharp [mailto:leesharp at hal dash pc dot org] 
Sendt: 16. september 2013 17:11
Til: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Emne: Re: SV: SV: [m0n0wall] Increase number of available ip-addresses

On 09/16/2013 04:19 AM, Ulrik Lunddahl wrote:

> My point with this comment was to remind everyone that Wireless
 > Ethernet is nothing close to switches, If you have to compare them  > to anything, they should be
seen more like hubs.

Not really.  They do not forward everything, but they do forward all broadcast.  it is kind of a
hubbed switch.  The WiFi side is a hub and all communication is shared, but the bridge between the
WiFi and wired is switched.  And if you choose "user mode isolation" a lot of the local side hub
goes away, but the contention does not.

WiFi is an ugly design, but it is popular. :)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch