Hello Christian, On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 03:10:49PM +0100, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Wednesday, January 09, 2013 02:15:40 PM Simon Wunderlich wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:28:44AM -0800, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > I still populate the WME fields; I need to "fix" paying attention to > > > them in the adhoc case. > > > > Applying the EDCA parameters in the hardware and sending "standard" WME IEs > > (without EDCA parameter sets) is understandable, Linux does that too. > > Well, the WFA WMM Specification v1.2 costs $99 (last time I checked, which wasn't > too long ago). However Johannes told me that the WMM IE should not be added > to IBSS beacons. I don't have the spec, and I don't intend to buy it. :) But: We do have WMM IE sent by Linux IBSS STAs even today. The difference to the AP WMM IEs is that it doesn't include EDCA parameters (cwmin/max, aifs, ...). But still, this is useful to detect that the other IBBS station is WMM-capable: we can then use QOS_DATA frames, use noack, etc ... > > However, we can still pack some EDCA parameters into beacons, probe/(re-)assoc > resps because there's an alternative IE. The "EDCA Parameter Set IE" is part of > 802.11-2012 8.4.2.31 - The Element ID is 12 [Table 8-54]. Ah didn't know that - thanks for pointing that out. Although I'm still in favor of not sending anything in IBSS and do local changes only. :) > > [Note: It's worth mentioning that the WFA WMM spec was just a stop-gap measure > until 802.11e was ready. Here's an article which explains this weird bit of > history, unfortunately it is in German > <http://www.heise.de/netze/artikel/Parallelnorm-WMM-223736.html>] > > Regards, > Chr
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
