[sugar] How do I connect to a Jabber server ?
Tue Aug 5 14:39:22 EDT 2008
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Mikus Grinbergs <mikus at bga.com> wrote:
> Morgan wrote:
>> Connecting to an AP disables the mesh, so I don't see the value of
>> what you want. Turning off the mesh while you are connected to a mesh
>> channel would simply (in the proposal) turn the wireless radio off
>> completely, resulting in neither gabble nor salut able to operate.
> Then I believe the language being used is imprecise. To me,
> "turning off the mesh" means turning off the __mesh__. If what is
> actually being turned off is the __radio__, then call it "turning
> off the wireless radio".
I don't actually believe this is the spec at all. I specifically
removed the "turn off" actions from the Mesh (and APs) because we
/don't/ want to turn off the radio for either of these cases, since
that would naturally prevent the other from working. I don't want to
conflate "disconnect from AP" and "turn off the mesh" with "turn off
the radio" at all.
> What I keep butting my head against is not being able to *control*
> what is going on. In my mind a 'mesh' is one interface, and an 'AP'
> is another interface. I would like to "turn off the mesh" when
> there are no local XOs, and no school server. You are saying that
> the 'AP' would get turned off as well. Not something I prefer.
Right, I agree with you. Turning off the Mesh should be possible in
theory; it makes sense. But as I understand it, at present, the only
way to "turn off" any NM device it to associate with another...in this
case, an AP. I'd /much/ prefer to have these be independent, so that
it's possible to connect/disconnect and/or turn on/turn off these
devices without interference.
>> The mesh and the AP are mutually exclusive.
>> gabble and salut are independent of the network topology.
> I'm sorry, but these memes have been said so many different ways
> that they no longer convey any information to me. If taking down
> the mesh can take down the AP, how can they be exclusive? If salut
> listens on the mesh, isn't that a dependence on there being a mesh?
They are mutually exclusive in that you cannot, at present, be
connected to both at the same time. It's one or the other, not both,
though I believe the goal is to change that in the future. As I
mentioned before, I strongly disagree with the idea that "turning off
the mesh" should be connected to "turning off the radio".
> Sugar mailing list
> Sugar at lists.laptop.org
More information about the Sugar-devel