Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 11:56:43 +0930 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Christopher Masto <chris@masto.com>, John Hay <jhay@icomtek.csir.co.za>, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> Cc: brooks@one-eyed-alien.net, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man4 wi.4 Message-ID: <20020507115643.N75198@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20020506.112028.96704416.imp@village.org> <200205061453.g46Er1L54189@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> <20020506135655.GA67245@netmonger.net> References: <20020505.143435.103661399.imp@village.org> <20020506135655.GA67245@netmonger.net> <20020506.112028.96704416.imp@village.org> <20020505.143435.103661399.imp@village.org> <200205061453.g46Er1L54189@zibbi.icomtek.csir.co.za> <20020504113032.D12386@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020503.224516.115910512.imp@village.org> <20020505132950.B20161@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20020505.143435.103661399.imp@village.org> <20020506135655.GA67245@netmonger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 6 May 2002 at 11:20:28 -0600, Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20020506135655.GA67245@netmonger.net> > Christopher Masto <chris@masto.com> writes: >> On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 02:34:35PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: >>> Sounds good to me. I don't mind breaking it in 5.0, so we'll have 4.x >>> adhoc means what it means now, and 5.x it will just be an alias for >>> ibss or ibss-master or whatever makes sense. >> >> Is it possible to start displaying a warning at some point, so people >> using adhoc will know it's slated to change? Or say I get one of >> these and use "adhoc" without carefully reading the documentation, it >> should tell me that it doesn't think that word means what I think it >> means. :-) > > You mean like > > wi0: You keep using adhoc. I don't think it means what you think it means. Well, more like: wi0: deprecated term 'adhoc' used. Check man page for replacements. On Monday, 6 May 2002 at 16:53:01 +0200, John Hay wrote: >>> >>> As the one who implemented this in FreeBSD, I think we should strongly >>> consider breaking this in 5.0. adhoc should never have been the Lucent >>> crap and I really regret that mistake. If nothing else, consider the >>> fact that adhoc works correctly with an(4) cards. I'd personaly prefer >>> that demo mode be something like link1 since it's evil and should die, >>> but I could live with demo-adhoc. >> >> Sounds good to me. I don't mind breaking it in 5.0, so we'll have 4.x >> adhoc means what it means now, and 5.x it will just be an alias for >> ibss or ibss-master or whatever makes sense. > > Should we maybe fold ibss and ibss-master into one option? From reading > OpenBSD's driver, I think one of the reasons that they have it separate, > is that the Symbol firmware do not support creating an ibss, well at > least we don't know how. Or are there times when would want to use ibss > without using the "create an ibss" option? Interesting question. You only need to create an IBSS once per IBSS network. I now have definitive proof that the station which creates the IBSS doesn't do very much: I've taken that station out of the net, and the other two machines can still talk to each other. But I can see issues when more than one station creates the IBSS: the net could partition itself into two different IBSSs, so I suspect we should keep the distinction, though the term "master" seems less appropriate. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020507115643.N75198>