On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 12:25:47PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 11:55 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:58:55AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:18 -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:43:38PM +0
On Mon, 2006-03-27 at 11:55 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:58:55AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:18 -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:43:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > > > This patch makes us default
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 12:58:55AM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:18 -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:43:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >
> > > This patch makes us default to 11M, which ought to work for most people.
> >
> > Is this code s
On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:18 -0800, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:43:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> > This patch makes us default to 11M, which ought to work for most people.
>
> Is this code supposed to work with IEEE 802.11a (which would also use
> OFDM modulation)? I
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:43:38PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> This patch makes us default to 11M, which ought to work for most people.
Is this code supposed to work with IEEE 802.11a (which would also use
OFDM modulation)? If yes, please note that 11 Mbps is not a valid IEEE
802.11a TX rate.
On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 16:04 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
> Please do resubmit the patch w/ the comment changes.
Below.
> I'd also like to see the outcome of the related discussion on the
> bcm43xx-dev list.
The discussion with Hans? I'm not sure that's really related to the
rates -- that's m
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 02:37:35PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 13:58 +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > We aren't particularly good at noticing when 54Mbps connections aren't
> > reliable and backing down to slower speeds. This patch changes the
> > default to 11Mbps.
> >
> >
On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 13:58 +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> We aren't particularly good at noticing when 54Mbps connections aren't
> reliable and backing down to slower speeds. This patch changes the
> default to 11Mbps.
>
> It's possible we'd want to leave it like this anyway -- even when we can
We aren't particularly good at noticing when 54Mbps connections aren't
reliable and backing down to slower speeds. This patch changes the
default to 11Mbps.
It's possible we'd want to leave it like this anyway -- even when we can
handle dynamic rate adjustment, it might make sense to start at 11Mb
