Any interest in doing this? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Feb 26, 2007 7:22 PM Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Docs for common class implementations To: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Oliver Neukum <oliver@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-usb-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 04:55:51PM -0500, Jon Smirl wrote:
On 2/26/07, Oliver Neukum <oliver@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am Montag, 26. Februar 2007 22:39 schrieb Jon Smirl: > > On 2/26/07, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > How about the wireless class, has anyone actually build a wireless > > > class device yet? > > > The dscape people should be integrating wireless USB class support > > > into their stack. > > > > I found the wireless class spec. > > http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/cdc_wmc10.zip > > This is intended for cell phones, not 802.11. USB group should do a spec for 802.11. All the devices I've seen are 95% similar in function but it is all vendor specific implementations. It would help solve the problem of 802.11 vendors refusing to release documentation for their "IP" (which turns out to not be any different between the vendors after the devices are reverse engineered).
Then create one. The USB specification process is very company driven, if you want to create a new spec, you get a few people together and do it and then release it to the group and then everyone submits proposals to clean it up and make it relativly sane. I participated in the creating of many USB specs a long time ago and it was a very open process, as long as you were a member of the USB interface group, which most companies are. thanks, greg k-h -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
