Subject: RE: mac80211 20/40 coexist
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Sujith Manoharan <c_manoha@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: "Manoharan, Rajkumar" <rmanohar@qca.qualcomm.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20327.2859.202760.119343@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <1331818214.3432.12.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <8F3AF1C9F856774F8C8D67AA7EDFEC8801E3005E@aphydexd01b>
	 <1331902885.6753.10.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <8F3AF1C9F856774F8C8D67AA7EDFEC8801E3040B@aphydexd01b>
	 <1332065984.3609.5.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20326.41009.17936.152095@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	 <1332145412.3359.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20327.1220.845693.349959@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	 <1332151743.3359.19.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20327.2859.202760.119343@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:12:46 +0100
Message-ID: <1332155566.3359.22.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20120319_121257_256257_A4923B65)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2012-03-19 at 16:02 +0530, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > 11.14.4.3 specifies that if the operating bandwidth has been changed by the AP
> > > to 20 MHz, then transmitting frames in an extension channel is not allowed ?
> > 
> > Ok, good point. Paul's case was regulatory related, where we
> > (voluntarily) ceased 40 MHz transmissions.
> > 
> > Still though, I think reconfiguring the channel type rather than the
> > rate control algorithm doesn't make a lot of sense in this case since
> > it'd make this very special and unlike the other cases (e.g. AP mode).
> 
> The regulatory issue could have been fixed by sending out the action frame
> specified in 7.4.10.2, no ?

Technically, but that would be assuming it's implemented everywhere ...
if it was tested by the WFA we'd implement it :-)

johannes