Search Linux Wireless

Re: [ath5k-devel] [ath5k] Incorrect value for ACK_TIMEOUT

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Any chance we can 'acquire' those test plans? ;-)
--
Jonathan Guerin



On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jonathan Guerin <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> So, we would prefer to match the spec for an out-of-the-box build,
>> even tho it would appear to be a worse-performing driving to users?
>
> If "an out-of-the-box build" means correctly working 802.11 device
> then my opinion is yes, we should strive to match the spec even if the
> performance decreases. Getting performance increases by violating the
> spec is just stealing airtime from others.
>
> But the challange is how to know if another 802.11 device is properly
> working and following the spec? I know that Wi-Fi Alliance
> certification tests contain lots of throughput tests to test for
> contending the medium. So, for example, can we trust a device which
> has passed Wi-Fi certification? I don't know.
>
> --
> 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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Host AP]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Kernel]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux