Subject: Re: SS channels

From: Charles Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 08:21:38 -0700 (PDT)

Chip,

> I've been thinking this over, and tend to agree with Miguel.
> It really is desirable (but not required) for a MANET protocol to
> be able to use multiple channels if they are supported by the
> radio. In particular, I feel it can be advantageous to use receiver-based
> spreading codes (either FH or DS) to allow multiple transmissions,
> in parallel, in the same radio range.

One would like to be able to figure out which of several channels
to use without periodically scanning all of them.  Are there clever
ways to arrange this?  What about requiring that such systems also
implement a control channel that is (effectively) a broadcast
medium, and which carries only information about which spreading
codes are in use?

> Therefore I propose that this be part of the applicability
> statement. A protocol's designers should state whether their
> protocol can use multiple channels in parallel, and if so, how.

I don't completely disagree, but I also think that the desired
domain of applicability should be very specifically spelled out.
Do we have to study Metricom to see whether our protocol would
work with that, and then study NTDR to see whether our protocol
would work with that, and then pick a common control channel
design and see whether our protocol would work with that, and
then, ...,  ...  ?  Eventually, I think that it might get tiresome.

Regards,
Charlie P.

PS. To Chip:  I'm not sure my mail is getting through to this list.
	      Can you tell me if you got this through your list
	      subscription as well as from the direct mail address
	      to [email-masked]?