On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>>> How difficult will it be to restrict this to Sierra modems with QMI
>>> service support? Or was that the set you meant we should
>>> unconditionally try the command on? If so, then I say "go!".
>>
>> I tried the QMI MBIM
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> What do you guys think, should we unconditionally try to send the FCC
>> auth via QMI over MBIM in the generic MBIM implementation? E.g. during
>> the power-up sequence.
>
> My memory lasts exactly this far: .
>
> Did we test
Aleksander Morgado writes:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Ralph Plawetzki wrote:
>> My modem needs that too and I can get it online, but as described it
>> gets a local IP then. From searching the web, many people had problems
>> getting the
Ralph Plawetzki writes:
> Am 09.06.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Aleksander Morgado:
>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Ralph Plawetzki wrote:
>> This is interesting then; the modem does get online (as opposed to the
>> QMI modems, which fail to set the
Am 09.06.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Aleksander Morgado:
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Ralph Plawetzki wrote:
> This is interesting then; the modem does get online (as opposed to the
> QMI modems, which fail to set the full-power mode), and it even gets
> an IP assigned, but
Am 09.06.2016 um 17:09 schrieb Dan Williams:
> QMI and MBIM are just different ways to talk to the modem's firmware.
> Like languages. QMI is proprietary to Qualcomm, older than MBIM, and
> ties much more closely to the firmware architecture of Qualcomm chips.
>
> MBIM is a "standard" protocol
On Thu, 2016-06-09 at 09:27 +0200, Ralph Plawetzki wrote:
> Am 08.06.2016 um 15:25 schrieb Bjørn Mork:
> >
> > Well, back to the real problem and possible soution: You can flip
> > the
> > modem into QMI mode by using a Sierra vendor specific QMI request,
> > via
> > the QMI-over-MBIM service. I