--- Rupert Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When configuring the client's RTS treshold...
> 
> "Setting this parameter to a small value causes RTS
> packets to be sent more often. When this
> occurs, more of the available bandwidth is consumed
> and the throughput of other network packets is
> reduced. However, the system is able to recover
> faster from interference or collisions that may be
> caused from a high multipath environment
> characterized by obstructions or metallic surfaces."
> 
> The client driver will look at the RTS retries to
> determine if in "distress" (i.e. not associated
> to an AP).  A scan is initiated to look for
> available APs.
> 
  This imo only supports the point that RTS/CTS should
be used i.e an optimal RTS threshold should be used.

bala
> This is what we like to call "Distress Roaming".
> 
> 
> --- Lalit Kotecha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Rupert,
> > 
> > May I request you to elaborate in little more
> details about this roaming
> > feature?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Lalit 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Rupert Wever
> > Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:13 AM
> > To: balan h; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [BAWUG] RTS threshold question
> > 
> > Balan,
> > 
> > Some (if not most) 802.11 NIC clients use this RTS
> treshold
> > to make roaming decisions.  Perhaps that's the
> reason?
> > 
> > -RW
> > --- balan h <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >  The RTS threshold value in many Access ports is
> set
> > > to 2300+ bytes as default value. This is
> apparently to
> > > disable RTS/CTS exchanges. I dont understand why
> we do
> > > this.
> > >  Isnt the RTS/CTS exchange used only in the
> > > 'Contention Period' of 802.11 where the Access
> point
> > > does no polling? Then shouldnt we enable RTS/CTS
> > > exchange most of the time by setting RTS
> threshold to
> > > a low value, to avoid collisions?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > balanh
> > > 
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you
> want.
> > > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> > > --
> > > general wireless list, a bawug thing
> <http://www.bawug.org/>
> > > [un]subscribe:
> http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you
> want.
> > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
> > --
> > general wireless list, a bawug thing
> <http://www.bawug.org/>
> > [un]subscribe:
> http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> > 
> > --
> > general wireless list, a bawug thing
> <http://www.bawug.org/>
> > [un]subscribe:
> http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
> http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.
http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
--
general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/>
[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to