This pages describes two different characteristics of nodes, the function of the node and it's status.
- Gateway Node - A gateway is an access point which allows clients to connect to it. It should either be connected to the internet and/or to the "wireless cloud".
- Repeater Node - A repeater doesn't have to share internet access but instead connects two or more other nodes together (wireless routers).
- Enduser Node - Someone who has a permanent connection to another node but isn't a gateway or a repeater.
Each type of node can then have a status.
Official - All systems go, and it conforms to the NodeStandards.
Working - All systems go, but it doesn't confirm to the NodeStandards.
- Broken - Was working ... once. Currently broken.
- Pending - The owner is in the process of setting up a node.
- Interested - The owner is considering setting up a node and is interested in being contacted.
After the last MonthlyMeeting I would like propose two more node types:
- End User - This is the location of a person who has a permenant connection to another node but doesn't currently share out access from their location. This is basically a sub-category of the Interested type but may be useful information from an RF troubleshooting point of view and from a social point of view because an End User probably has more gear and experience then an interested node.
- Repeater - This is the location of a node which doesn't share access but connects two or more nodes together.
The only remaining issues is that currently the map's NodeType selection mechanism is exclusive (you can only belong to one type). So I'd like to do one more reworking and finally propose this:
Node types 1-3 can have a status of either Working or Broken (less politically correct but I think it's clearer language then Active/Inactive). I'd also like to include one more status type of "Official" or something like that. That means that the node is configured to our NodeStandards and that someone has audited it and approved that it's basically all legit.
Yeah, the Seattle concepts are a little different then what I'm trying to address here. This is basically purely for the mapping application, not from a network architecture point of view. -- AdamShand