Return-path: Received: from ra.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.52]:4132 "EHLO ra.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752935AbYE1M7I (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 May 2008 08:59:08 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 20:41:00 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Dan Williams Cc: Tomas Winkler , JMF , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] iwlwifi: fix oops on wep key insertion Message-ID: <20080528004100.GG7779@tuxdriver.com> (sfid-20080528_145924_539786_70F658E1) References: <1211865214-1640-1-git-send-email-joonwpark81@gmail.com> <1ba2fa240805262341s62f017e7ka7502cbe55c1d348@mail.gmail.com> <1ba2fa240805270541wadf0f16t2001528f39b37ea8@mail.gmail.com> <1211896423.1746.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1211896423.1746.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 09:53:43AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > I've gotten maybe 1 or 2 requests for > 104/128-bit WEP key support for > NM in 3 years. Nice to have, but I'm not sure it's worth the extra code > and maintenance burden? Would be good to have somebody tell us what > hardware (APs and cards) support this though. I'm inclined to think that it is _not_ worth the trouble for this particular feature. John -- John W. Linville linville@tuxdriver.com