I'm using Ubiquiti SR71-A and it worked fine as an AP. xxiao --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Pavel Roskin <proski@xxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Pavel Roskin <proski@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Best (ath9k) miniPCI card for testing overall AP functionality > To: "Philip A. Prindeville" <philipp_subx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 5:46 AM > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 15:36 -0700, > Philip A. Prindeville wrote: > > I'm trying to get Astlinux ready for the 0.7 release, > but we've been > > hamstrung in testing because of issues with the ath5k > drivers on our > > test platform... so I've been considering > getting different hardware > > for testing. We've not been able to shake-down > our transition from > > wireless-tools to iw, or from hostapd 0.6.8 to 0.6.9. > > > > I'm guessing that the ath9k tends to be further along > in functionality, > > and more stable, than the ath5k? > > I think it's true for AP functionality. In any case, > there is not much > code shared between ath5k and ath9k, so if you have a > driver specific > problem with ath5k, ath9k is unlikely to have the same > problem. > > > If that's the case, one of our partners that gives > discounted pricing on > > F/OSS development hardware has the following NICs: > > > > Ubiquiti SR71-A = Atheros AR9160 with DFS > SUPPORT > > Ubiquiti SR71-12 = Atheros AR9220 with DFS SUPPORT > > Ubiquiti SR71-15 = Atheros AR9220 with DFS SUPPORT > > > > > > > > I'm looking for b/g or n hardware, and the more power, > the better. > > > > The 'A' doesn't seem to work with x86 based systems, > as far as I can tell. > > I have an AR9160 based miniPCI card, and it's working fine > on a x86_64 > based system. I don't think I tested it with a 32-bit > kernel, but I > don't expect any problems. > > I think the Ubiquiti page for the card would have a warning > it it was > true, but I don't see any warning here: > http://www.ubnt.com/products/sr71a.php > > By the way, AR9160 is supported by MadWifi, unlike > AR9280. MadWifi is > not actively developed, but if you need another reference > point, you'll > have it. > > > The '12' is b/g/n, 27dBm and uses MMCX connectors, and > is type III-A format. > > > > The '15' is a/n only, also 27dBm and uses MMCX > connectors... also type > > III-A format. > > > > I'm leaning towards a '12', but they're not cheap. > > > > According to: > > > > http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/ath9k > > > > and: > > > > http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Drivers/ath9k/products/external > > > > none of the above cards are supported... but > that assumes that the Wiki > > is up to date. > > I don't thing the term "up to date" really could apply > here. It would > apply it there was a definite list and it was easy to > update the wiki > from it. > > In fact, the list is only updated when somebody has such > device and > makes sure that it works. As you said, Ubiquiti card > are not cheap. > > > Also the AR9220 isn't shown on the > list of supported > > chipsets. > > The Atheros people here should know better, but I think > either AR9220 > implies AR9280 or vice versa. > > MikroTik RouterBoard R52N has a chip marked AR9220, yet we > know that > it's supported. > > > Can anyone confirm or deny that it's unsupported? > > I'm quite sure that all those cards are supported, but I > cannot > guarantee anything. > > -- > Regards, > Pavel Roskin > -- > 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 > -- 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
