Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:26:21 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Monthadar Al Jaberi <monthadar@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fragment number of first fragment != 0 Message-ID: <CAJ-VmomRZ0KDHxTRnUJ=zcbHvxtHxZeKxJgYvbCS2ZdDbbgaqg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2BsBSoKCFzntOBKw-OsT2FxFkhhTsc7PAnsTns-6EHhkmjfbQQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA%2BsBSoKCFzntOBKw-OsT2FxFkhhTsc7PAnsTns-6EHhkmjfbQQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Lemme check into this a little more..
adrian
On 14 February 2012 00:19, Monthadar Al Jaberi <monthadar@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found that in FreeBSD current the first fragment will have a
> fragment number = 1 in function ieee80211_fragment.
>
> But according to 802.11-2007, 9.4 Fragmentation page 279:
> "...The fragments shall be sent in order of lowest fragment number to
> highest fragment
> number, where the fragment number value starts at zero, ..."
>
> This also holds on the 802.11-2011 draft 12:
> "The fragment number is set to 0 in the first or only fragment of an
> MSDU or MMPDU and is
> incremented by one for each successive fragment of that MSDU or MMPDU."
>
> I checked Linux 3.3-rc3 code and there I see them having a check on rx side
> if (frag == 0) { /* This is the first fragment of a new frame. */
> and on tx side they put:
> fragnum = 0;
>
> On Madwifi 0.9.4 in function ieee80211_encap:
> fragnum = 0;
>
> So should we change our fragno to be 0?
>
> br,
>
> --
> Monthadar Al Jaberi
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-wireless-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmomRZ0KDHxTRnUJ=zcbHvxtHxZeKxJgYvbCS2ZdDbbgaqg>