On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Hm, that sounds right, what's the code doing wrong?
Currently, it seems the sta sends back ht params the ap included in a
PROBE_RESP packet. So, the ap could send ampdu packets bigger (in
byte) than the sta can handle or packet gaps are different from the
sta wants after ba session is created. (During ba session negotiation,
these params are not exchanged, only window sizes (frame count), seq
#, and token.)
> On 15 February 2013 17:09, PseudoCylon <moonlightak...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> Shouldn't a sta include iv_ampdu_rxmax and iv_ampdu_density instead
>> when associating?
>> 1) A driver initiates iv_ampdu_rxmax and iv_ampdu_density based on h/w
>> 2) When a sta trying to associate,
>> case IEEE80211_FC0_SUBTYPE_ASSOC_REQ:
>> ieee80211_add_htcap(); /* the function in question */
>> 3) When an ap receives the assoc_req packet, the ap will save ht
>> params to ni_htparam. Then the ap will use those values for Tx
>> 4) The sta will receive packets which size is within the limits if the
>> sta included iv_ampdu_rxmax and iv_ampdu_density.
>> email@example.com mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-wireless-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-wireless-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"