Jouni Malinen <j@xxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 08:36:03PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote: >> I see your point, I also have had to suffer because of buggy APs >> having unstable TBTT. But the cost for this is high, currently it >> increases two seconds the time to signal a lost connection to the user >> space. I would hope to have something faster. > > How can that take two seconds? I was just referring to the current implementation. > All that would be needed here is to send out a unicast Probe Request > to the current AP and wait for a Probe Response for a short timeout, > say 20 ms. That shouldn't take more than 50 ms or so at most.. I agree. Or sending a null frame and waiting for ack is even faster, but I think mac80211 doesn't yet have infrastructure to check the acks. And not all hardware can support this, unfortunately. > If the current implementation uses two seconds for this, there is > certainly room for improvement there and I would rather see that > done than lose this extra protection against buggy implementations > (either AP or STA for that matter). Sure. But the thing is that there are a lot of buggy APs which are broken is so many different ways that I would like to have a limit for workarounds we create. But I guess this workaround might still be useful. I'll revisit this whenever I find time to work on roaming improvements, hopefully after few weeks. -- Kalle Valo -- 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
