Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:33824 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751021AbcDMIB2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2016 04:01:28 -0400 Message-ID: <1460534484.3057.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20160413_100131_740803_CFBF6450) Subject: Re: General VHT rate-ctrl question From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:01:24 +0200 In-Reply-To: <570D8956.8090806@candelatech.com> (sfid-20160413_014843_049708_B2F53AD9) References: <570D8956.8090806@candelatech.com> (sfid-20160413_014843_049708_B2F53AD9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2016-04-12 at 16:48 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > If a station and it's peer can both do VHT, is there ever a good > reason to even try HT rates? > Not really; perhaps if you could do HT greenfield preamble (which VHT doesn't have) you could get something out of it, beyond that I don't see a reason to try. Unless, for some strange reason, it supports only single stream VHT and dual-stream HT or something really weird? johannes