Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:11:19 +0200 From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor?= Stefanik <netrolller.3d@gmail.com> Cc: Richard Farina <sidhayn@gmail.com>, Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>, Rafael Laufer <rlaufer@cs.ucla.edu>, Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com>, linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, misc-openbsd <misc@openbsd.org>, Thomas d'Otreppe <tdotreppe@aircrack-ng.org>, freebsd-mobile <freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org>, Mike Kershaw <dragorn@kismetwireless.net>, Damien Bergamini <damien.bergamini@free.fr>, Sam Leffler <sam@freebsd.org>, tech-openbsd <tech@openbsd.org>, netbsd-net <tech-net@netbsd.org>, wireshark-dev <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>, radiotap <radiotap@radiotap.org> Subject: Re: Plans for an online meeting regarding Radiotap Message-ID: <1250867479.4600.11.camel@johannes.local> In-Reply-To: <69e28c910908210804h6181aab1w4a864392239aa1ac@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A8EAFA6.9010608@gmail.com> <1250865255.4600.6.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908210741wd3bc391x311523f5b55fd4f1@mail.gmail.com> <1250865918.4600.9.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908210804h6181aab1w4a864392239aa1ac@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-ElfnJgk9tnc3Yp/l4bdE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 17:04 +0200, G=C3=A1bor Stefanik wrote: > I've reworked RTS/CTS since then, just haven't got to sending a new > proposal yet. The current plan is as follows: >=20 > TX_FLAGS & 0x0002: Use CTS > TX_FLAGS & 0x0004: Use RTS > TX_FLAGS & 0x0020: Disable RTS/CTS usage Seems a bit strange, wouldn't setting neither RTS nor CTS have the effect? Seems like 0x20 should rather be "use automatic and ignore the other bits". Anyway, not appropriate here, you should just bring a new proposal. > If I remember correctly, I made an implementation for the Linux kernel > (a generator-side implementation) and one for Wireshark (a parser-side > implementation). Or should I make two generator-side implementations > according to the requirement (e.g. one for Linux, another for > OpenBSD)? No, that was ok, I just meant that therefore by definition it can't be a problem of lack of implementations. johannes --=-ElfnJgk9tnc3Yp/l4bdE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAABAgAGBQJKjrkUAAoJEODzc/N7+QmalQsP/iShDji6pLnoxRRQH9hIITK5 Su/qvKUnalSzN+Yo0nw6SS2ZWDAApWGgQv0ipIS/1yDFyunsb0DFVte3YEyKU6el cal0ncZFOVon+dguVzpHljD3DKPEsg92o9UzH0sKa3PLDIvqWXRAvgKlyP3cwTqG aJwIOI0YiZpaEbF/VyeEVkjk7lXyzLxs238sC/H9ysXU9DuKlELadRyOBuLB0lt9 mIbVXCZSxe04jLMg7Yn5B5NCsdLcE1PrM1NmljCZWDeJW4aVdsAl5JGf10ewLetb ea35bEZcr6W15CU/zotk+d03Ryf/rghwduPyIawcqtQtHhyIfqWlkxU0ikYgYJIM y1Mh+ZD4F6cetzEHkORdMMzuWMkplvDReiu+l6+0zoKGqAa/pH1A+McitEHl6qTi vQYyGZodDbAf9zWujmDSVHXECvkjeSRDbdFJiwz2MG3rcQYJmcWRhOaAnvAuh2j3 LOAWvOVVEA5eU/rZYyjVqcidwFkcEGlXzOuj9t+NkEg9X+BpEKmBdj4fPP2rEQNZ xjZ7xrXRL7mw+nn3a2oJLMuzN9IPReuUotoHsSmuHijVUVqpIkhvC8ZDuwVDZtKR Kw+NuFt75ViEaOCKUb/qEoJExpGxY0dG2JctnuZeeyIFushslEmzw07QwKXCNXdv EaNIs2pGTsW1AyF/Fwh9 =Im+o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ElfnJgk9tnc3Yp/l4bdE--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1250867479.4600.11.camel>