Hello Sam, hello Nick, thank you for your hints. Multicasting was an option already before. With your expert opinion I am now confident, that this idea wasn't that bad. Anyway, i will have a look at the hints given by Nick. Thank you for your thoughts. It will help me. Best regards from Germany, Dennis Sam Leffler schrieb: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Dennis Borgmann < > dennis.borgmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> Hello John, >> >> the goal would be to have a transmission as fast as possible while >> ignoring, if a packet reached its destination or not. I'd like to test >> wireless performance regarding transmission time in a dedicated >> environment. As far as I can see, backoff might already push the >> transmission times up quite a lot and if I'd even add the time of - >> worst case - 10 retransmissions, the transmission time of one packet >> will grow even more. >> >> It would be second-rank, if the packet reaches its destination. Loss of >> some packets is not a problem in my testbed. >> >> So I'd like to disable usage of ACKs in order to be off with the only >> problem - backoff. Disabling this would of course be nice, but I fear, >> that's far more work that just disabling ACKs. >> >> > > Send multicast frames. > > -Sam > > -- 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
