From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Young Subject: Re: RTS/CTS + CTS-to-self Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:35:19 -0500 Message-ID: <20090821223519.GE1436@ojctech.com> References: <4A8EAFA6.9010608@gmail.com> <1250865255.4600.6.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908210741wd3bc391x311523f5b55fd4f1@mail.gmail.com> <1250865918.4600.9.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908210804h6181aab1w4a864392239aa1ac@mail.gmail.com> <1250867479.4600.11.camel@johannes.local> <69e28c910908211455u5dcd70f0u94eab510ab91a69a@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <69e28c910908211455u5dcd70f0u94eab510ab91a69a-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> Sender: radiotap-owner-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org To: radiotap List-Id: radiotap@radiotap.org On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:55:27PM +0200, G=E1bor Stefanik wrote: > 2009/8/21 Johannes Berg : > > On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 17:04 +0200, G=E1bor Stefanik wrote: > > > >> I've reworked RTS/CTS since then, just haven't got to sending a new > >> proposal yet. The current plan is as follows: > >> > >> TX_FLAGS & 0x0002: Use CTS > >> TX_FLAGS & 0x0004: Use RTS > >> TX_FLAGS & 0x0020: Disable RTS/CTS usage > > > > Seems a bit strange, wouldn't setting neither RTS nor CTS have the > > effect? Seems like 0x20 should rather be "use automatic and ignore th= e > > other bits". Anyway, not appropriate here, you should just bring a ne= w > > proposal. >=20 > The point is that if all bits are 0, auto-setup is used. The problem > with my original proposal (using two bits) was that an all-zero value > had different effect than not including the TX flags field (and simply > swapping "none" and "auto" would result in an illogicality where what > would logically be "use both" would become "use neither" - just the > opposite of its logical meaning). Making 0x20 mean "Auto-select > RTS/CTS", interpreting all-zeros as "Use neither", would have the same > problem as my proposal - all-zeros is different from a missing field. > (An empty, zeroed field 15 should have no effect on the process, > behaving as if field 15 was not present in the header.) G=E1bor, Please explain what is wrong with a two-bit (four-state) field like this? 00: Let the hardware, firmware, or device driver decide. (I.e., same as omitting Tx flags altogether.) 01: Send RTS/CTS. 10: Send CTS to self. 11: Forbid CTS-to-self and RTS/CTS. This is just a small modification to one of your previous proposals. (Note that I have trimmed the lengthy To: line!) Dave --=20 David Young OJC Technologies dyoung-eZodSLrBbDpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933