Return-path: Received: from mail-bk0-f49.google.com ([209.85.214.49]:61836 "EHLO mail-bk0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932241Ab3AISGD (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:06:03 -0500 Received: by mail-bk0-f49.google.com with SMTP id jm19so1091373bkc.22 for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 10:06:01 -0800 (PST) From: Christian Lamparter To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: mac80211 and RX of A-MPDU with missing back agreement Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:05:57 +0100 Cc: Johan Danielsson , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <201301091446.44597.chunkeey@googlemail.com> <1357739673.9757.15.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1357739673.9757.15.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Message-Id: <201301091905.58042.chunkeey@googlemail.com> (sfid-20130109_190607_702688_F51AC36B) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 02:54:33 PM Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 14:46 +0100, Christian Lamparter wrote: > Why do we even tear down RX sessions at all? ti's wl1271 has fixed rx ba agreement limit. Also 802.11-2012 10.5.4 states: "Every STA shall maintain an inactivity timer for every negotiated Block Ack Setup. [then it goes on what the originator and recipient should do...]". The recipient needs to be able to tear down BA session too. Regards, Chr