| To: | Scott Feldman <sfeldma@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink |
| From: | Jean Tourrilhes <jt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:50:14 -0700 |
| Address: | HP Labs, 1U-17, 1501 Page Mill road, Palo Alto, CA 94304, USA. |
| Cc: | Gertjan van Wingerde <gwingerde@xxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, jkmaline@xxxxxxxxx |
| E-mail: | jt@xxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1087412780.3351.34.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organisation: | HP Labs Palo Alto |
| References: | <C6F5CF431189FA4CBAEC9E7DD5441E0103AF626C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <40CF263E.70009@xxxxxxx> <1087377197.25912.54.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <40D08769.3070106@xxxxxxx> <1087412780.3351.34.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | jt@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 12:06:21PM -0700, Scott Feldman wrote:
>
> For example, do we really want to burden the user with the decision of
> whether they need to set a maximum fragment size? Or what the
> sensitivity threshold should be? The point is, we need to find the
> minimal set of settings to get the job done.
For the record, those commands were added in 1997 for
sensitivity and 1999 for frag/rts. For the card of those ancient time,
setting those parameters was important, as the Access Point was not
pushing them to the cards.
Have fun...
Jean
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Prism54-devel] Re: [Prism54] CVS -> bk tree update, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink, Jean Tourrilhes |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink, Scott Feldman |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink, Jean Tourrilhes |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |