On 2011-09-21 12:37 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Felix Fietkau<nbd@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2011-09-20 11:26 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Felix Fietkau<nbd@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If we want to properly enforce Annex J channel pairs, this needs to
be moved to cfg80211.
This does not still address the issue of one peer finding out it
cannot deal with an HT40 pair and correcting the topology and
propagating this out. Not yet sure if for 802.11ac we'll need
something similar but its worth considering.
Don't think of it as a topology. Each node makes its own decisions about
HT40+/HT40-/HT20.
OK lets go with an example.
Node A: HT40+
Primary: 5785 (157)
Extension: 5805 (161)
Node B: HT20 as it finds a legacy AP with on 5805.
Channel: 5785 (157)
Node C: HT40-
Primary: 5785 (157)
Extension: 5765 (153)
So we want to support this setup?
What if the network changes and we cannot use the original HT40 pair
now but we can later? This applies even to today's hostapd AP setup
and more rhetorical.
Whenever a node is not alone in an IBSS, it must keep the primary
channel the same to be able to talk to its neighbors. If it cannot use
its HT40 opmode because of overlap checks then it should just gracefully
fall back to HT20. Refusal to join or randomly changing the primary
channel would create big problems for bigger deployments, IBSS merging
should always be considered potentially unreliable.
Most big ad-hoc mesh deployments use fixed channel and fixed cell-id for
that reason.
- Felix
--
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
