Re: [Madwifi-users] problem with bitrates

[Sam L. <sa...@er...>]

On Tuesday 23 November 2004 09:17 am, Thorsten von Eicken wrote:
> At 02:45 PM 11/23/2004 +0100, Jonas T=C3=A4rnstr=C3=B6m wrote:
> >I pointed out a place where this could happen before (line 305) and also
> > suggested how to fix it, which Mr. Leffler said he would do or did he
> > just forget to?
>
> Uhh, I wish I had remembered your post. Would have saved me a whole bunch
> of hours troubleshooting! I can't find your suggested fix, however, could
> you forward that to me?
>
> Overall, I don't understand what is supposed to happen. This presumably
> goes back to the question of what the semantics of "iwconfig rate X" are.=
 I
> assumed it just tells rate control to stay on a fixed rate, just as if
> onoe/amrr had decided to stay put and not change anymore. This should not
> have any impact on negotiation, and in fact I suspect it only has due to a
> bug related to the ordering of the bitrates in the association-request
> message (see long dump in my previous message). So if you fix the rate on
> the AP that should not constrain the rate on the managed node. However, t=
he
> fact that "iwconfig rate" causes a disassociation and reassociation makes
> me think that someone decided that this is really very different from just
> staying put on a specific rate...

Locking the xmit rate on the station can require renegotiation if the curre=
nt=20
negotiated rate set does not include the requested rate.  Locking the xmit =
on=20
the ap can cause stations to be dropped if they don't support the specified=
=20
rate. The current code in ieee80211_wireless.c probably does not check any =
of=20
this and just forces a reset of the state.  Feel free to supply a patch.

 Sam