From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guy Harris Subject: Re: Correct radiotap header for 802.11ad Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:17:46 -0700 Message-ID: <126B842D-05EA-4510-BC9B-DB1A4AABEC12@alum.mit.edu> References: <38F46E1D-1C4A-48DC-A906-9522006E8474@alum.mit.edu> <1606812C-649C-4C06-ABE0-AE2F4474BCD0@alum.mit.edu> <1440402013.3735.1.camel@sipsolutions.net> <55DE44EB.6080603@superduper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <55DE44EB.6080603-vp0mx6+5gkqFX2APIN6yfw@public.gmane.org> Sender: radiotap-owner-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org To: Simon Barber Cc: Richard Sharpe , Johannes Berg , radiotap-S783fYmB3Ccdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: radiotap@radiotap.org On Aug 26, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Simon Barber wrote: > The HT and VHT fields are missing various bits of phy layer info, and = are defined missing enough bits for other fields. I've always thought It = would be much simpler if these fields could convey the whole SIGNAL bits = from the PLCP header, along with a mask in case it's not all available. = The drivers I've seen have the whole PLCP SIGNAL field available. So that's the L-SIG bits from 20.3.9.3.5 "L-SIG definition", and either = the HT-SIG bits from 20.3.9.4.3 "HT-SIG definition" or the VHT-SIG-A = bits from 11ac's 22.3.8.3.3 "VHT-SIG-A definition" and the VHT-SIG-B = bits from 11ac's 22.3.8.3.6 "VHT-SIG-B definition"? And for 11ad, would it be the bits from 21.5.3.1.1 "General"?=