On Thu, 2009-04-16 at 20:47 +0200, Gábor Stefanik wrote:
> Alternatively, the meanings of the {0,0} and {1,1} cases could be
> switched around (making the {0,0} case more logical, at the expense of
> the {1,1} one):
>
> TX Flags absent: Use RTS & CTS as needed.
> TX Flags present: {
> RTS=0, CTS=0: Use RTS & CTS as needed.
> RTS=0, CTS=1: Use CTS-to-self.
> RTS=1, CTS=0: Use RTS/CTS-handshake.
> RTS=1, CTS=1: Use neither RTS nor CTS.
> }
>
> (By reading the second proposal again, I find it more and more
> sympathetic... but let the discussion decide.)
That _works_, but is impossible to describe in any feature discovery.
johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
