Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:38375 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761522AbYFZSXE (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:23:04 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: Pavel Roskin Subject: Re: [Q] ath5k : doesn't support AP mode? Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:22:38 +0200 Cc: Johannes Berg , Stefanik =?iso-8859-15?q?G=E1bor?= , cs010101@gmail.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, John Linville References: <002901c8d737$e51bb2f0$3b0aa8c0@39fb6b6b6f434b3> <1214503739.3783.14.camel@johannes.berg> <1214504288.18039.12.camel@dv> In-Reply-To: <1214504288.18039.12.camel@dv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Message-Id: <200806262022.38890.mb@bu3sch.de> (sfid-20080626_202318_868785_EA8A3242) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 26 June 2008 20:18:08 Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 20:08 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > I also suspect that certain fixed are needed only for 802.11g or 802.11b > > > compliance, but not for the original 802.11 compliance. > > > > > > Say, if we limit the rate to 1 Mbps, are there any issues that really > > > make us non-compliant? > > > > The fact that we cannot limit the rate like that that? > > That shouldn't be hard to implement. We are not going to work around the bugs, I guess. I'd suggest to put the patch into wireless-testing only. -- Greetings Michael.