From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 26 21:44:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A24D16A403 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:44:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from msrv.matik.com.br (msrv.matik.com.br [200.152.83.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D627843D53 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:44:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from anb (anb.matik.com.br [200.152.83.34]) by msrv.matik.com.br (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k3QLi4uC077837; Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:44:05 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) From: JoaoBR To: Sam Leffler Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:44:01 -0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200604252258.k3PMwJ74026969@monk.cnd.dundas.on.ca> <200604260905.04706.joao@matik.com.br> <444F974B.2060108@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <444F974B.2060108@errno.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604261844.01739.joao@matik.com.br> X-Filter-Version: 1.11a (msrv.matik.com.br) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88, clamav-milter version 0.87 on msrv.matik.com.br X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ath0: ath_chan_set: unable to reset channel 5 (2432 Mhz, flags 0x3e0 hal flags 0x140) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 21:44:24 -0000 On Wednesday 26 April 2006 12:52, Sam Leffler wrote: > > No. releng5 has an older hal that does not even support regdomain 18. > Backporting work to releng5 would be a massive effort for very little > gain; anyone that truly wants wireless support should be running 6.x or > later. > ok and agree but 5 is not that bad if you do not need all the encryption st= uff=20 and probably better than 6.0 (not releng_6), I am talking hostap here. releng_6 has some working improvements now which are in big parts your work= I=20 guess since I found that rate_onoe makes ath hostap stable I have now some boxes = out=20 and they are almost 10 days under load and running best switch for me actually is -apbridge unfortunatly if_bridge still does not convince in practice but bridge is fi= ne=20 now anyway I think it's great work so far thank's Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br