Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:60838 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761477AbXHCOuQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:50:16 -0400 Subject: Re: [ipw3945-devel] chaning mode only when interface down? From: Johannes Berg To: Derek Atkins Cc: dragoran , "Winkler, Tomas" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, network manager , ipw3945-devel@lists.sourceforge.net In-Reply-To: References: <1186058047.24230.38.camel@johannes.berg> <46B1D28F.1080006@gmail.com> <1186059192.24230.44.camel@johannes.berg> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Y20ukOWLqkkXSqlUeHqU" Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:50:22 +0200 Message-Id: <1186152622.4647.48.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-Y20ukOWLqkkXSqlUeHqU Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 10:33 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote: > Um, what state? Sure you lose your layer 2 state, but why force a > layer 3 lossage when you don't necessarily have to do so? For > example, I've seen plenty of networks that have both 802.11(a) and > 802.11(b/g) networks that share absolutely everything at layer 3. > Indeed, at home I have an a/b/g AP where layer 3 is always shared. At > the IETF last week it was also shared. I could easily roam from the > 802.11(a) to the 802.11(b/g) network if my wireless driver would let > me; the IP Address I've got is certainly valid on both networks. Why > should the driver try to be smarter than I am? Can you please re-read the original mail? Thanks, johannes --=-Y20ukOWLqkkXSqlUeHqU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iD8DBQBGs0Cu/ETPhpq3jKURApf6AJ4hRl5gOK5MOngj6nLRapQelASASACbBLI6 zQZaLsYbFyDFZCTsaCyO1mw= =5Gwx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Y20ukOWLqkkXSqlUeHqU--