On Fri, 2019-07-12 at 15:16 +0000, Igor Mitsyanko wrote: > On 7/12/19 1:40 PM, Arend Van Spriel wrote: > > > > > > The inclusion of the "HE extended capabilities" element is determined by > > the dot116GOptionImplemented option. (band[6G] != NULL) provides that > > condition although there are other ways to solve that I guess :-p > > Come to think of it. Does mac80211 need that. Guess IEs are provided by > > user-space, right? > > Maybe not for transmission, but we probably will need to parse peer's > IEs at least to properly fill SCAN information and properly report > peer's capabilities. Probe requests may also be transmitted there though 6 GHz scanning is sufficiently complicated this might not happen; as well as association request which definitely this is relevant to. > > > However, from a feature advertisement point of view, we might very well > > > consider 6 GHz to be a separate nl80211 band, in particular if there > > > *are* indeed differences around what rates are permitted? Which is > > > really the only place where we care. Or maybe, thinking about this more, > > > if there could be devices that have different capabilities in 6 GHz than > > > in 5 GHz, in the sense of HT/VHT/HE capabilities? > > > > Regarding rates the answer seem to be in clause 26.17.2.1 as well: > > > > """ > > A STA shall not transmit an HT PPDU in the 6 GHz band. A STA shall not > > transmit a VHT PPDU in the > > 6 GHz band. A STA shall not transmit a DSSS, HR/DSSS, or ERP-OFDM PPDU > > in the 6 GHz band. > > """ > > > > I may be wrong but that seems to say only HE rates are allowed. > > Unless I'm wrong myself, this leaves us with 5GHz OFDMA PHY (802.11a). > Further in 26.17.2.1 spec states the following regarding beacons: > "the Beacon frames may be sent in non-HT duplicate PPDUs." OFDMA is HE :-) 802.11a is OFDM (Clause 17, at least in 802.11-2016), but I think you're otherwise right. > I think we do need a new value in band enum, it seems natural because: > - it has different capabilities > - it has different rates > maintaining this information in any other way seems will be much more > cumbersome. I'm starting to agree here despite having initially thought it wasn't necessary, and so I'll review Arend's patches again with an eye towards actually merging them. johannes
