Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 19:17 +0200, matthieu castet wrote:
2304, I think, as that's
synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
Yes but if it is bigger the frame get framented at the 802.11 layer : in
theory we could put mtu (IP max packet size) a bi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a patch for 802.11 linux stack.
It works for mtu like 2000 but if the packet is fragmented (with mtu = 3000 for
example) my usb dongle (zd1211) crash (doesn't work anymore until I replug it).
I need to investigate a bit.
zd1211rw requires explicit support for lar
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:47:12PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 17:35 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
>
> > I am pretty sure this is the maximum _fragment_ size.
>
> But then why does it talk of MPDU and MSDU?
Maybe because your understanding is closer to what the standard sa
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 17:35 +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> I am pretty sure this is the maximum _fragment_ size.
But then why does it talk of MPDU and MSDU?
from 802.11:
synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
synonym sMaxMpduLng Integer = /* max octets in an MP
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 05:35:17PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 September 2006 15:55, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 15:57 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Also I wonder what should be the max mtu.
> >
> > 2304, I think, as that's
> > synonym sMaxMsduLng Inte
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 15:55, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 15:57 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Also I wonder what should be the max mtu.
>
> 2304, I think, as that's
> synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
>
> But maybe I'm interpreting t
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 19:17 +0200, matthieu castet wrote:
> > 2304, I think, as that's
> > synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
> >
>
> Yes but if it is bigger the frame get framented at the 802.11 layer : in
> theory we could put mtu (IP max packet size) a big as we
Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 15:57 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also I wonder what should be the max mtu.
2304, I think, as that's
synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
Yes but if it is bigger the frame get framented at the 802.11 layer : in
th
On Wed, 2006-09-27 at 15:57 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Also I wonder what should be the max mtu.
2304, I think, as that's
synonym sMaxMsduLng Integer = 2304; /* max octets in an MSDU */
But maybe I'm interpreting the spec wrongly?
johannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "
Hi,
Selon Jiri Benc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:01:32 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 07:17:31PM +, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> > > So why a special mtu handler is not implemented in 802.11 stack :
> > > - 802.11 stack doesn't support bigger packet
>
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:01:32 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 07:17:31PM +, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> > So why a special mtu handler is not implemented in 802.11 stack :
> > - 802.11 stack doesn't support bigger packet
> > - 802.11 stack doesn't support very bigger packet
On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 07:17:31PM +, Matthieu CASTET wrote:
> So why a special mtu handler is not implemented in 802.11 stack :
> - 802.11 stack doesn't support bigger packet
> - 802.11 stack doesn't support very bigger packet (with
> 802.11 fragmentation)
> - 802.11 writers were lazy
I suspe
So why a special mtu handler is not implemented in 802.11 stack :
- 802.11 stack doesn't support bigger packet
- 802.11 stack doesn't support very bigger packet (with
802.11 fragmentation)
- 802.11 writers were lazy
Matthieu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
t
From: Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:59:48 -0500
> Where/how does the device allow it? When I tried 'ifconfig eth0 mtu
> 2000' on my VIA Technologies, Inc. VT6102 [Rhine-II] wired
> controller, I got a 'SIOCSIFMTU: Invalid argument' message, which is
> the same message
On 9/23/06, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/23/06, Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:40:15 -0500
> >
> >> The maximum value for MTU is set in include/linux/if_ether.h for
David Miller wrote:
From: Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:40:15 -0500
The maximum value for MTU is set in include/linux/if_ether.h for all
ethernet-type communications, not in softmac or ieee80211. I doubt
that one could easily change the number. It may be that the 80
From: Larry Finger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 16:40:15 -0500
> The maximum value for MTU is set in include/linux/if_ether.h for all
> ethernet-type communications, not in softmac or ieee80211. I doubt
> that one could easily change the number. It may be that the 802.11
> standard a
Matthieu CASTET wrote:
Hi,
why softmac (and maybe device using linux 80211 stack) can't increase
their mtu above 1500 ?
IRRC 802.11 allow to send bigger frame. Moreover some driver like airo
allow to use mtu biger than 2000.
The maximum value for MTU is set in include/linux/if_ether.h for all
Hi,
why softmac (and maybe device using linux 80211 stack) can't increase
their mtu above 1500 ?
IRRC 802.11 allow to send bigger frame. Moreover some driver like airo
allow to use mtu biger than 2000.
thanks,
Matthieu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the
Hi,
why softmac (and maybe device using linux 80211 stack) can't increase
their mtu above 1500 ?
IRRC 802.11 allow to send bigger frame. Moreover some driver like airo
allow to use mtu biger than 2000.
thanks,
Matthieu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the
20 matches
Mail list logo
