Felix Fietkau wrote:
> At some point, I will try to come up with an implementation for
> ath9k which doesn't involve such voodoo, but instead compares
> the tx timestamp of some data packets against the rx timestamp
> of ack packets.
Would this mean, that we could get per station ACK timeouts?
If so, this would be very useful in an IBSS network. In such an
environment one might talk to nodes whose distance to the sender
vary over a broad range.
--
Regards
Joerg
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verf?gt ?ber einen herausragenden Schutz gegen Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 00:39 -0800, Joerg Pommnitz wrote:
> Felix Fietkau wrote:
> > At some point, I will try to come up with an implementation for
> > ath9k which doesn't involve such voodoo, but instead compares
> > the tx timestamp of some data packets against the rx timestamp
> > of ack packets.
>
> Would this mean, that we could get per station ACK timeouts?
> If so, this would be very useful in an IBSS network. In such an
> environment one might talk to nodes whose distance to the sender
> vary over a broad range.
Not likely that _any_ hardware supports that, it'd have to modify the
timers all the time. I suppose some firmware _could_ support it, but
it's a huge complexity for extremely little gain. In any case, setting
it to the max would be sufficient for this case, give it a thought :)
johannes