Talk:History of wireless mesh networking

Author releasing rights to all content material[edit]

Content of email sent to Permissions Nov 13. [Ticket#2007111310019315]

I am Francis daCosta, the author of this article. I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WIKIthreegenerationslg.gif and associated text.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Self-form-self-heal.gif and associated text

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Single-radio-mesh.gif and associated text.

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Third-Generation-mesh-hop.gif and associated text.

I agree to publish that work under the free license LICENSE [choose at least one from <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>.]. I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs. I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the image may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project. --Fdacosta 19:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC) ______________[reply]

Francis deCosta description was someone accurate in that he showed 3 distinct networks; however, I have to question that they are generational. The word Generation is too much a marketing term and should be left to describe new innovation, standards, etc. The main body of work is excellent. Looking at the Generation question I see the IEEE as the second generation of wireless mesh networking and the standards in which these will be deployed. Newer technology is being development that would make a single radio card node no longer obsolute such as using it with MIMO technology. For that reason only I believe call everything that deCosta wrote a first generation would be appropriate until a new standard can be adopted. Thanks DAM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.186.167.6 (talk) 21:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original and Unencyclopedic[edit]

This article is marketing material, not historical analysis. It should be deleted, and locked out if necessary. Its claims, without documented 3rd party sources, continue to leak into other parts of Wikipedia. temujin9 (talk) 10:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added the "original research" and "unencyclopedic" tags (it was me, sorry, I had forgotten to log in). I added "original research" because there are no references as to how the described evolution happened. I added "unencyclopedic" because this looks like a somehow narrow point of view, not general enough for an encyclopedia and probably too technical and with too much technical jargon to be legible. --Fpoto (talk) 16:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Authors Response

I am the founder at MeshDynamics. MeshDynamics has made significant and notable contributions to Wiki in terms of content regarding multi-radio backhauls and animations explaining different mesh architectures. We are regarded as the pioneers when it comes to third generation mesh.

The page does not in any way advertise MeshDynamics. It focuses on MeshDynamics core patented technology that resulting in new emerging markets for wireless mesh. And all references are well researched. A short google session will confirm that.

Please do take a look at other mesh companies on Wiki. There are quite a few. And there is absolutely nothing notable in terms of their technology contribution to Wireless Mesh Networking.

In the event that this article has these comments, in fairness, all companies listed under wireless mesh networking in Wiki, should also be commented. I am willing to take this to the highest levels at Wiki. I simply wish us to be treated fairly, especially when, unlike others, we have kept content to core facts, not hype. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdacosta (talk • contribs) 23:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article isn't a history of mesh networking as much as it attempts to be an architectural review of MeshDynamics networking technology. I think restructuring it to be a history would imply the introduction of a time scale of some kind. Bdamm (talk) 22:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this article thinking that it was about the history of WMNs, but instead i find it like a description of how a WMN can be made. There is nothing about the history of WMNs. I think that the name of this article should be changed or the article be rewritten or deleted.--190.225.13.1 (talk) 02:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge article[edit]

Propose merging this article with Wireless mesh networking. Its history bit is negligible. Wikipedia isn't 1-article per company... Lfstevens (talk) 23:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree--Pot (talk) 13:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect[edit]

Per this talk page discussion, redirecting this page over to Wireless mesh networking as this page is mostly a WP:PROMO for the company MeshDynamics (User:Fdacosta disclosed COI, but still was advert.) Nasa-verve (talk) 20:07, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]