Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <e7ac13b53f3bf77e1ec786496200013aa9602d9e.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] wmediumd: don't treat management frames as noack
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:12:39 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20200323190831.GB5207@bobcopeland.com> (sfid-20200323_200835_774964_1437A415)
References: <20200323152542.68696-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
         <20200323162245.19716cc94db4.Ib4a8bb12802840a3b9ed7e2e9ca1748a4e77e6ee@changeid>
         <20200323190831.GB5207@bobcopeland.com>
         (sfid-20200323_200835_774964_1437A415)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.4 (3.34.4-1.fc31) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 15:08 -0400, Bob Copeland wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 04:25:42PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
> > 
> > It's incorrect to treat management frames as noack, they're
> > retransmitted just like any other frame; fix this.
> 
> I think it was just a hack to make mesh paths establish even
> if snr was terrible, obviously not realistic.  Thanks!

But wouldn't it be the other way around, i.e. they're *less* likely to
be established without retries (noack)?

Anyway, doesn't really matter, just caught my eye there the other day :)

johannes