On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 19:41 -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote: > Agreed on 802.11a vs. b/g as long as frequency is used for configuration > (as is the case here; channel numbers would not have been unique). > Dropping the b vs. g is somewhat unfortunate, though. Agreed. I can live with leaving it in. > Furthermore, frequency may not be unique in future with additional PHY > changes. Having option of setting both a "mode" and frequency is a pair > is a good way of making sure the design is more future proof in this > area. Agreed as well, the plan for nl80211 was to have the tuple set together. I quite dislike the idea of this internal "next_mode" state but I suppose it's the best we have now. However, this is the reason David Woodhouse couldn't get his Broadcom based card to work in B mode, hostapd tried to select a B mode channel and b43 doesn't offer any since it offers G mode. Should the burden be on the driver authors here, or should we somehow select a G channel if B isn't available? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
