Am Dienstag, 16. September 2008 03:21:17 schrieb Luis R. Rodriguez: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Helmut Schaa <hschaa@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Ok, I'll sum that up. Moving the policy into user space is a good thing > > if the quality values are comparable. Once mac80211 recognices a > > noticable quality change we could use IWEVQUAL to notify user space about > > it. Furthermore (if desired) the signal could be extended to not only > > report a value between 0 and 100 but could also contain flags indicating > > lost beacons, excessive retries etc. > > If you are going to add a new sort of notification can you please use > nl80211? No need to keep wireless extensions on life support. Sure. Nevertheless I'd like to use the already existing IWEVQUAL (without modifications) too. Hence the supplicant's wext-driver could use the plain quality value to decide when it is time to trigger a scan while the nl80211-driver could use more indicators. Arguments for or against moving the decision to user space (by notifying the supplicant only about signal quality changes without rating the values)? Thanks, Helmut -- 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
