On Thursday 12 April 2007 18:28, Niall O'Higgins wrote:
Interesting, I have always found the radio in ural(4) (and rum(4) which
is next-generation chip) to be excellent. Much better than ral(4) and
even wi(4) in my experience.
Better than Senao/Engenius wi(4)?
2007/4/12, Darrin Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:18:28AM +0200, Maxime DERCHE wrote:
A recent thread (04/04/2007) on this list showed that the ralink
chipsets are well supported by OpenBSD.
If I recall, there was also talk about lower signal strength with
ralink. For
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:15:45AM +0100, pedro la peu wrote:
The usual recommendation is ral(4)
Or acx(4), ath(4), rtw(4), rum(4), wi(4).
rtw(4) seems to have some issues with hostap. At least it did not send out
beacons. jsg@ may know more (I don't have such a card to play).
I'm a big
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 09:37:31AM +0200, Wijnand Wiersma wrote:
2007/4/12, Darrin Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:18:28AM +0200, Maxime DERCHE wrote:
A recent thread (04/04/2007) on this list showed that the ralink
chipsets are well supported by OpenBSD.
If I
On 4/11/07, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking to build on OpenBSD 4.0 (4.1?) a wireless access point for a small
network. I would like to hear what cards have proven to be the most
effective in this arena. I am very interested in small form factor machines
with possible onboard
A recent thread (04/04/2007) on this list showed that the ralink
chipsets are well supported by OpenBSD.
I think any wireless card with a ralink chipset will do the job.
See http://openbsd.org/i386.html#hardware (Wireless Ethernet Adapters)
if you need more information.
Maxime
Peter wrote:
I'm
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 02:18:28AM +0200, Maxime DERCHE wrote:
A recent thread (04/04/2007) on this list showed that the ralink
chipsets are well supported by OpenBSD.
If I recall, there was also talk about lower signal strength with
ralink. For an access point this is important, but could be
The usual recommendation is ral(4)
Or acx(4), ath(4), rtw(4), rum(4), wi(4).
My advice would be ral(4) I have also used ath(4) however the G mode
does not work real well, I would suspect that ral(4) would be one of
the first devices to support 80.211n. in OpenBSD (Someone correct me
if I am wrong on this)
Sam Fourman Jr.
On 4/11/07, Darrin Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original message -
Or acx(4), ath(4), rtw(4), rum(4), wi(4).
I thought we shouldn't support ath?
On 4/11/07, pedro la peu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The usual recommendation is ral(4)
Or acx(4), ath(4), rtw(4), rum(4), wi(4).
10 matches
Mail list logo
