[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC] Wireless extensions rethink

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...


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>