On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:03:00AM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 02:16:08PM +0200, David Coppa wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think this misses a "to".
> >
> > OK?
> >
> > Index: hostapd.8
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/hostapd/hostapd.8,v
> > retrieving revision 1.16
> > diff -u -p -r1.16 hostapd.8
> > --- hostapd.8 24 May 2010 19:44:23 -0000 1.16
> > +++ hostapd.8 24 Jul 2011 12:15:43 -0000
> > @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ IAPP message if a new station has been a
> > If the
> > .Nm
> > receives ADD.notify messages it will request the Host AP
> > -remove a station which has been associated to another access point.
> > +to remove a station which has been associated to another access point.
> > .Pp
> > .Nm
> > may also handle dynamic roaming of IP addresses and routes in
> >
>
> The whole paragraph seems a tad confusing. Perhaps
>
> "hostapd broadcasts an ADD.notify IAPP message when a new station
> is associated to the Host AP. When hostapd receives an ADD.notify
> message it tells the Host AP to remove the specified station."
>
> .... Ken
i think ken's wording reads more clearly, so i'd plump for that.
note that the current text is not grammatically wrong (at least not in
my books), but the phrasing may be a little unorthodox. i'd rather see
the references to hostapd with the definite article ("the hostapd")
removed. which ken's wording does ;)
jmc
