[ns] Why ns-2??
nima.nafisi at kcl.ac.uk
Fri Apr 8 08:38:52 PDT 2005
You also have lower layers implementation.
You have Eurane implementation of UMTS air interface (not included in
the original ns code)
You also have some UWB code,...
You can build on top!
> Something that I've found in the NS mailing list archive:
> NS doesn't actually model the physical layer. NS does not implement
> As the PHY is concerned, NS only includes some primitive wireless
> interface regarding 802.11a/b. The modulation/coding scheme is not
> NS works well at the application, transport and network layers, but it
> does not provide supports to model the lower layers. OPNET is a better
> choice if this issues have to be addressed (is it right?).
> OPNET is free for universities (but to get technical support/updates
> one has to pay anyway :)
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Asim" <asim.sidds at gmail.com>
> To: <ns-users at ISI.EDU>
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 5:40 PM
> Subject: [ns] Why ns-2??
>> I've been working on ns-2 for the past 4-5 months but whenever i give
>> a presentation, the first question asked is why are you using ns-2 and
>> not any other network simulator like OPNET? and most of the time i
>> dont have any good answer so can anyone please tell me why is ns-2 the
>> best option to be used.
More information about the Ns-users