Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:52219 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754566Ab0EIApN (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 May 2010 20:45:13 -0400 Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 20:40:07 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: pigiron Cc: Javier Cardona , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: The case of the bogus SSID Message-ID: <20100509004006.GA5790@tuxdriver.com> References: <20100505120131.2b9f4e06@atom.pigiron.org> <20100506215613.43477434@atom.pigiron.org> <20100508093445.581e180e@atom.pigiron.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20100508093445.581e180e@atom.pigiron.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 09:34:45AM -0500, pigiron wrote: > On Fri, 7 May 2010 09:29:18 -0700 Javier Cardona wrote: > > I don't know about the router, nor if the IE ID clash is causing your > > problem, but moving the mesh codes somewhere else in the unassigned ID > > space would be a "A Good Thing To Do (tm)". > Really? > > Wouldn't that cause a problem for the kids running OLPC? For instance, where > some of the laptops are running an old level of code where WLAN_EID_MESH_ID=52 > and others are running new code where WLAN_EID_MESH_ID=X. If I'm not mistaken, the mesh done in OLPC is already incompatible w/ 802.11s anyway. John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.