Return-path: Received: from nbd.name ([46.4.11.11]:41070 "EHLO nbd.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754712Ab2HERMf (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2012 13:12:35 -0400 Message-ID: <501EA97B.3010703@openwrt.org> (sfid-20120805_191238_582924_59C32460) Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:12:27 +0200 From: Felix Fietkau MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: WDS vs. multi-channel operation References: <1343655393.4452.13.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1343655393.4452.13.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2012-07-30 3:36 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > Ok so I'm chipping away at multi-channel operation, but WDS is > troubling. Which channel should it use? It doesn't even have channel > configuration today, but relies on having a channel already, but that > breaks when you have multi-channel since then it either has to have its > own channel or be slaved to another channel... > > Anyone have any ideas? Let's bind WDS interfaces to AP VIFs, then they can be slave to the AP's channel context. This is necessary for my yet-to-be-resubmitted WDS fixes anyway. - Felix