From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb 27 22:01:44 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527941065678
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:01:44 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com)
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (mail0.rawbw.com [198.144.192.41])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3947B8FC1D
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:01:44 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from yuri@rawbw.com)
Received: from mail0.rawbw.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail0.rawbw.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m1RM0MUD004564;
	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:00:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from www@localhost)
	by mail0.rawbw.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m1RM0MGA004563;
	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:00:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Authentication-Warning: mail0.rawbw.com: www set sender to yuri@rawbw.com
	using -f
Received: from ip139.carlyle.sfo.ygnition.net (ip139.carlyle.sfo.ygnition.net
	[24.219.144.139]) by webmail.rawbw.com (IMP) with HTTP 
	for <yuri@mail1.rawbw.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:00:22 -0800
Message-ID: <1204149622.47c5dd76995ba@webmail.rawbw.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:00:22 -0800
From: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>
To: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
References: <1204146470.47c5d1267ceee@webmail.rawbw.com>
	<47C5D8F6.20608@errno.com>
In-Reply-To: <47C5D8F6.20608@errno.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.1
X-Originating-IP: 24.219.144.139
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Is it possible that modern wireless card only supports WPA and
	not WEP or this is a bug in the driver?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 22:01:44 -0000

> WEP is always supported.  The WEP capability bit means the driver uses 
> the hardware.  Many driver writers were too lazy to implement full 
> driver support and just fall back on the host to do crypto.

I see. I am sure anybody who doesn't know this will get confused and will
have the same question.

Isn't it better to have 2 separate flags in CAPS: for example WEP and WEPHW?
WEP would mean that WEP is supported and WEPHW would mean that it's supported 
through hardware.

Yuri