Return-path: Received: from mail022-1.exch022.serverdata.net ([64.78.22.98]:43827 "EHLO mail022-1.exch022.serverdata.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751386Ab2LTLzz (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2012 06:55:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 03:55:54 -0800 From: vivekanandah@posedge.com To: Johannes Berg Cc: Subject: Re: Re: adding =?UTF-8?Q?ba=5Fpolicy=20member=20in=20drv=5Fampdu?= =?UTF-8?Q?=5Faction=20op=20-=20request=20information?= In-Reply-To: <1356003605.10029.9.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <53a9b58ee917248d8fa617dd1bbcde83@posedge.com> <1355407319.9463.4.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <1356003605.10029.9.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Message-ID: (sfid-20121220_125600_470915_02717304) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: hi johannes, i agree on that count :) thanks and regards Vivek On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:40:05 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 02:39 -0800, vivekanandah@posedge.com wrote: > >> is'nt the station's capability and the AP capability intersected >> during >> association? i always thought that the comment was mis-represented. >> >> i did a small test and i see that the stations capability is >> actually >> the subset of AP capabilities that both support. >> if that is the case, then we do not have to check for the capability >> independently there! do i miss something in my understanding? >> >> also, if what i have stated above is correct, then yes, i feel >> delayed >> block ack as a feature might need to be implemented on mac80211 and >> then >> check for the same. > > I don't see what difference that makes? You still have to implement > the > feature fully, we don't have support for it at all. > > johannes > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe > linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html