Return-path: Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:9436 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754725AbZHEFyO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Aug 2009 01:54:14 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e21so1334533fga.17 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2009 22:54:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1249451506.6902.2.camel@johannes.local> References: <1249056817.20593.1.camel@maxim-laptop> <1249056896.20593.3.camel@maxim-laptop> <1249438947.3094.30.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1249450153.6083.4.camel@maxim-laptop> <1249450416.4168.22.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908042250n1e0bf9c6v20b6301db9e3286b@mail.gmail.com> <1249451506.6902.2.camel@johannes.local> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor_Stefanik?= Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 07:53:54 +0200 Message-ID: <69e28c910908042253t67e5aa93j1db74dfe187a9bd1@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 001/002] [MAC80211] Retry probe request few times To: Johannes Berg Cc: Maxim Levitsky , Marcel Holtmann , linux-wireless , linville , Reinette Chatre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2009/8/5 Johannes Berg : > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 07:50 +0200, G?bor Stefanik wrote: > >> My ?0.02 (? because I'm European :) ): Shouldn't probe requests be NO_ACK? > > Of course not. What makes you think so? > > johannes > > It just feels illogical to me that the AP essentially has to respond to probes twice (it sends an ACK, then a probe response) - but if that is what the 802.11 spec calls for, then its fine. -- Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-)