From owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 9 13:10:50 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5D337B401 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 13:10:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dmlb.org (pc2-cmbg4-6-cust36.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [81.96.76.36]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8296943F75 for ; Wed, 9 Apr 2003 13:10:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dmlb@dmlb.org) Received: from slave.my.domain ([192.168.200.39]) by dmlb.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 193Ltw-0002Mw-00; Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:10:32 +0100 Received: from dmlb by slave.my.domain with local (Exim 3.36 #1) id 193Ltw-0005nw-00; Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:10:32 +0100 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.2 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <200304091852.h39IqC1L080610@whizzo.transsys.com> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 21:10:32 +0100 (BST) From: Duncan Barclay To: "Louis A. Mamakos" Sender: Duncan Barclay cc: Tobias Roth cc: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: hostap (was: good pcmcia card to build ap) X-BeenThere: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile computing with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 20:10:50 -0000 On 09-Apr-2003 Louis A. Mamakos wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 03:34:39PM +0200, Erik Paulsen Sklerud wrote: >> > >> > > I'm like Tobias looking to make an accessPoint, but with a >> > > PCI type card >> > > instead, but it should be the same I think? Could someone please name >> > > some cards based on the PRISM-chip, if that's the only card >> > > supporting hostAP >> > > in FreeBSD? >> >> but then, do I really need hostap? i tried out ad-hoc mode with a linksys >> card, and it seems to work just fine. i didn't get much smarter by googling >> for hostap. what are the advantages of it (especially when I use only one >> acess point, not multiple ones?). I have multiple machines that need to >> connect at the same time though, all with different operating systems >> (FreeBSD, WinXP, OSX). But that also shouldn't cause trouble, as far as I >> understand the situation. > > In infrastructure mode (vs. ad-hoc mode) you'll get more effective > channel utilization in the situation where each of the other stations > cannot hear each other. Google for "hidden terminal problem" and > read all about it. However, the station to station bandwidth is reduced by a factor of two because of the relaying. If you are only using .11 to wirelessly star your machines into a server then an AP (or hostap) is good. However, if you are using it as a peer to peer network then ad-hoc gives better throughput (as long as they can hear each other). > louie > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-mobile > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-mobile-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- ________________________________________________________________________ Duncan Barclay | dmlb@dmlb.org | dmlb@freebsd.org|