netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: generic 802.11 stack

To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: generic 802.11 stack
From: Vladimir Kondratiev <vkondra@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 08:44:38 +0300
Cc: acx100-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, greg chesson <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx>, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>, "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, prism54-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx, sam@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040915031732.GL7839@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4145352F.4040807@xxxxxxxxx> <20040915030545.GA25307@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040915031732.GL7839@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.7
Let me answer to the set of questions raised:

- dual licensing: I am not ready to answer for legal. I will discuss with 
proper people and answer.

- code style: regardless of answer on question above, I intend to do Linux 
work and will not care about compatibility macros. I really dislike such 
macros, they do make code hard to understand.

- information sharing (driver-stack): good question indeed. I am currently 
evaluating it. This far, I think I will supply some standard link layer 
information per packet. Like rate, RSSI etc. For Tx, it will include also 
crypto key for hardware assisted encryption, type of protection (RTS/CTS 
etc.) I believe it should be sufficient. To prove it, I am going to write 
some dummy .11 driver that will be capable to simulate any Rx, with user 
interface for feeding packets. I will use this driver to debug stack.

It is complex issue to support all combination of job separation between host 
and NIC, I will choose some model like "NIC do almost nothing" and will 
develop around it. 

Vladimir.

On Wednesday 15 September 2004 06:17, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
LR> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:05:45PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
LR> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 11:02:11PM -0400, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
LR> > > I proposed dual licensing not to specifically allow clear
 compatibility LR> > > among linux and the BSDs on the 802.11 work, but to
 allow BSDers to do LR> > > whatever they want with what we come up with --
 help with code sharing. LR> >
LR> >
LR> > Overall, He Who Writes The Code Gets To Choose.
LR> >
LR> > My own personal opinion is that the BSD license goes against the stated
LR> > spirit of Linux -- contribute back.  But that's just me.
LR> >
LR>
LR> Agreed -- but in this case I feel we're the bigger crowd so I wanted to
LR> address to the *author* that I feel we should be considerate to the BSD
LR> crowd.
LR>
LR>  Luis
LR>

Attachment: pgpUA1f30e9HX.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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