Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[Richard Sharpe]

Hi folks,

Is this the radiotap mailing list?

I am involved in updating the 802.11 dissector in Wireshark to handle 802.11AX.

It seems like the first thing needed is an HE presence flag in the
radiotap header.

Is this correct and has anything happened in that area?

-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe
(何以解憂？唯有杜康。--曹操)

Re: Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[David Young]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:34:49AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> Is this the radiotap mailing list?

It is.  I *think* that radiotap-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, however, is the
"canonical" address.

I don't know what's happening with 802.11AX, but I think somebody else
will chime in.

Dave

-- 
David Young
dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981

Re: Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[Arend Van Spriel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 722 bytes --]

Johannes already posted some proposals.

See:

http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE
http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU
http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU-other-user

Regards,
Arend

Op 14 dec. 2017 18:43 schreef "David Young" <dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>:

> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:34:49AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Is this the radiotap mailing list?
>
> It is.  I *think* that radiotap-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, however, is the
> "canonical" address.
>
> I don't know what's happening with 802.11AX, but I think somebody else
> will chime in.
>
> Dave
>
> --
> David Young
> dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1550 bytes --]

Re: Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[Arend Van Spriel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 896 bytes --]

Op 14 dec. 2017 18:51 schreef "Arend Van Spriel" <
arend.vanspriel-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
>
> Johannes already posted some proposals.
>
> See:
>
> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE
> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU
> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU-other-user

Did I really top-post :-S

> Regards,
> Arend
>
>
> Op 14 dec. 2017 18:43 schreef "David Young" <dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 09:34:49AM -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > Is this the radiotap mailing list?
>>
>> It is.  I *think* that radiotap-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, however, is the
>> "canonical" address.
>>
>> I don't know what's happening with 802.11AX, but I think somebody else
>> will chime in.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> --
>> David Young
>> dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org    Urbana, IL    (217) 721-9981

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1716 bytes --]

Re: Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[Richard Sharpe]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Arend Van Spriel
<arend.vanspriel-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Op 14 dec. 2017 18:51 schreef "Arend Van Spriel"
> <arend.vanspriel-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>:
>>
>> Johannes already posted some proposals.
>>
>> See:
>>
>> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE
>> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU
>> http://www.radiotap.org/fields/HE-MU-other-user

Yes, I noticed those, but no bit assignments have been made. At least
one organization is interested in this.

Is it a case of ANA (Add Next Available?)

It will mean making sure that the tools doing captures add the bits
and that things like Wireshark are backward compatible.

-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe
(何以解憂？唯有杜康。--曹操)

Re: Allocation of new presence bits, eg for HE, etc

[Johannes Berg]

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 10:05 -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> 
> Yes, I noticed those, but no bit assignments have been made. At least
> one organization is interested in this.

:-)

> Is it a case of ANA (Add Next Available?)

Yeah, that's really the only thing that makes sense, since parsing
relies on the bit order.

I've made my experimental Linux patches write it with bit 23 (and
haven't implemented the HE-MU/other-user yet).

> It will mean making sure that the tools doing captures add the bits
> and that things like Wireshark are backward compatible.

Yeah.

Maybe we can/should have a "tentatively defined" state? I have been
reluctant to post this for formal adoption because the HE spec isn't
done yet, but at the same time we want this to be already usable by
people.

johannes