From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Alwin Beukers" Subject: RE: [RFC] VHT fields Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 11:37:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: ,<4FDF7426.2050202@superduper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FDF7426.2050202-vp0mx6+5gkqFX2APIN6yfw@public.gmane.org> Content-Language: en-US Sender: radiotap-owner-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org To: Simon Barber Cc: "radiotap-sUITvd46vNxg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org" List-Id: radiotap@radiotap.org Hi Simon,=0A= =0A= > I'm not very familar with 11ac - but does this information together=0A= > with the packet data give you enough to calculate precisely the=0A= > packet's duration in time? Are there any duration fields, as there are=0A= > in 11n that might be useful?=0A= =0A= Haven't tried it, but I think you would have all the required info.=0A= =0A= Section 22.3.2 of the 11ac draft has the durations of the training and=0A= signal fields. The duration of VHT-LTF depends on the total number=0A= of space-time streams (NSTS), which you can get from the SU_VHT=0A= and MU_VHT fields.=0A= =0A= The radiotap header doesn't contain the data length from the =0A= VHT-SIG-B field, but I guess you can get that from the packet data=0A= itself. There is a datarate calculation in the Wireshark patch I sent=0A= with the proposal.=0A= =0A= Alwin=0A= =0A= > =0A= > Simon=0A=