On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 23:44 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 17:42 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > Well, you can do DHCP a second or so, I'd think? And EAPOL much quicker, > > > of course. I don't really see any reasonable minimum time? We might want > > > to enforce a max though, maybe. > > > > Not quite. A lot is dependent on the server itself, and I've had users > > on university and corporate networks report it sometimes takes 30 to 60 > > seconds for the whole DHCP transaction to complete (DISCOVER, REQUEST, > > OFFER, ACK). Sometimes there's a NAK in there if the server doesn't > > like your lease, which means you need another round-trip. So in many > > cases, it's a couple round-trips and each of these packets may or may > > not get lost in noisy environments. > > Oh, yes, of course. However, we're talking about optimising the good > cases, not the bad ones. Think of it this way: if it goes fast, we > shouldn't make it slow by putting things like powersave or similar in > the way. If it's slow, then it'll still work, just slower. But when > "slower" only means a few hundred milliseconds, it doesn't matter if > everything takes forever (30-60 secs) True, but at least 4 or 5 seconds is the minimum time I'd recommend here for DHCP. Dan -- 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
