Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 09:20:22 +0930 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.org, wes@softweyr.com, dunham@dunham.org, jdunham@m3designinc.com, jdunham@texas.net Subject: Re: Ad-Hoc with Windows? Message-ID: <20020504092022.J12386@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20020503.082221.37493394.imp@village.org> References: <1020327165.442.165.camel@chowder.gsoft.com.au> <20020502183058.A52284@wantadilla.lemis.com> <1020331032.442.168.camel@chowder.gsoft.com.au> <20020503.082221.37493394.imp@village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, 3 May 2002 at 8:22:21 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: >>> - The BSDs are doing it wrong. We should be using IBSS mode, not demo >>> ad-hoc. > > ad-hoc is insufficient. We should create a media option like OpenBSD > has called master-ibss which does the right thing for the different > types of hardware. Why master-ibss? What's the difference between that and IBSS? I haven't found this term in the standard. >>> - IBSS mode works with all systems I've tried it with. > > Assuming that you have new enough firmware in your lucent cards. > >>> - To set IBSS mode with Lucent cards, use -p 1 (just like managed mode >>> or whatever we'll call it this time). > > Assuming that you have new enough firmware in your lucent cards. You > need at least 6.0.3 to be able to use non-demo mode ad-hoc (IBSS). > Otherwise, it won't work, according to reports I've seen. Yes, correct. It doesn't work with older firmware. I can confirm that. >>> - On the Lucent cards, you don't get a signal strength indication. > > Lucent cards are the only ones I've seen that have good signal > indication. However, it is in wicontrol -C only, not in the normal > wicontrol output. Ah, interesting. On one machine (running CURRENT from 12 December 2001), it only shows the last machine contacted, but on a more recent CURRENT it shows at least two of them. Is this a difference in the cards or in CURRENT? >>> One of the details about which Wes and I couldn't agree was whether an >>> IBSS can route to the outside world. I say yes, because any system in >>> the IBSS can have other interfaces as well. This isn't covered in the >>> 802.11 standard, of course. Wes says no, because the 802.11 standard >>> (available for free from >>> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11-1999.pdf, which >>> is nevertheless a web page) says that interconnection only works with >>> BSS (i.e. managed) mode. I claim that this just refers to link-level >>> interconnection, and that IP routing has nothing to do with 802.11. >>> Comments welcome. > > IBSS is a mode that you need to do routing with. It won't bridge for > you. You need access point for that. Maybe that's what Wes is > talking about: the ability to put the access point on a network and > have it deal properly with bridging the traffic onto the lan. No, Wes was saying that the standard required an access point in order to connect to an external network at all, and the fact that I could do it without an access point was a coincidence which "shouldn't work". > Finally, a lot of stuff is in flux right now :-) I can't see anything significant in the drivers. For me, it Just Works. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020504092022.J12386>