On 8 February 2012 23:23, Martin Langhoff <martin.langh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:16 AM, Sridhar Dhanapalan > <srid...@laptop.org.au> wrote: >> Ad-hoc connections only scale to a limited number of participants >> before problems begin to occur. > > The technically correct answer is "it depends". And it is true, it > depends on a ton of factors. > > As a rule of thumb, I've seen it work for groups of 5~6 units, > physically close and without interference sources or reflective > materials. I would not aim higher than that -- 5~6 units in a channel. > You have 3 channels, so 3 groups of 5~6 units.
Great, that's what I was thinking. > To clarify: keep any other laptops and cordless phones in the vicinity > _off_, to allow these 18 users to work. In practice, it won't work in > a school, but if you invite a few schoolmates home after school, or in > the park, you're fine. > > No warranties expressed or implied. There's a long laundry list of > things that can interfere, and make things not fine. > > For example, professional TV cameras from that friendly news crew > transmit in the 2.4GHz band. That battery pack feeds a powerful > antenna to get the signal back to the van that has the uplink, and it > paves over consumer-grade wifi. > > So don't count in wifi (of any kind!) to work for a demo or > show-and-tell when you get TV coverage at a school :-) Interesting - definitely worth knowing! >> Can we impose a hard limit on the number of clients to prevent too >> many XOs connecting to a single ad-hoc session? > > As James says... unfortunately no. This is possible on many wireless access points. Why isn't it possible on the XO's ad-hoc? Is it because WAPs do it by limiting DHCP leases, whereas ad-hoc uses link-local? Sridhar Dhanapalan Engineering Manager One Laptop per Child Australia _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel