Return-path: Received: from yx-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.44.28]:29792 "EHLO yx-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754148AbYIHUsg (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Sep 2008 16:48:36 -0400 Received: by yx-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 8so928794yxm.1 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:48:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1ba2fa240809081348n17a3b4c5o4d67e989dfd79030@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20080908_224840_644464_7C71AE31) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:48:34 +0300 From: "Tomas Winkler" To: "Jouni Malinen" Subject: Re: HT action frame code Cc: "Johannes Berg" , "Ron Rindjunsky" , linux-wireless In-Reply-To: <48C5868B.8060103@w1.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <1220883730.31304.60.camel@johannes.berg> <48C5868B.8060103@w1.fi> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Jouni Malinen wrote: > Johannes Berg wrote: >> >> When we're an AP, shouldn't we also in some way honour the block-ack >> action frames? Or will that be done in hostapd, which then sets up >> block-ack via some unspecified way? > > The current design assumes that hostapd takes care of all management frames, > so eyes, these would need to go to hostapd for processing and then setup > back to mac80211 through some new command.. > Enable BA in AP mode is really trivial. It definitely worked in our AP project. Tomas