Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 17:58:01 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> To: grog@lemis.com Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.org, wes@softweyr.com, dunham@dunham.org, jdunham@m3designinc.com, jdunham@texas.net Subject: Re: Ad-Hoc with Windows? Message-ID: <20020503.175801.101616114.imp@village.org> In-Reply-To: <20020504092022.J12386@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <1020331032.442.168.camel@chowder.gsoft.com.au> <20020503.082221.37493394.imp@village.org> <20020504092022.J12386@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20020504092022.J12386@wantadilla.lemis.com>
"Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@lemis.com> writes:
: On Friday, 3 May 2002 at 8:22:21 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
: >>> - The BSDs are doing it wrong. We should be using IBSS mode, not demo
: >>> ad-hoc.
: >
: > ad-hoc is insufficient. We should create a media option like OpenBSD
: > has called master-ibss which does the right thing for the different
: > types of hardware.
:
: Why master-ibss? What's the difference between that and IBSS? I
: haven't found this term in the standard.
'ibss-master' is the master ibss you need one of these. 'ibss' is for
all the other nodes on the network. This is approximately the -c
flag.
: >>> - On the Lucent cards, you don't get a signal strength indication.
: >
: > Lucent cards are the only ones I've seen that have good signal
: > indication. However, it is in wicontrol -C only, not in the normal
: > wicontrol output.
:
: Ah, interesting. On one machine (running CURRENT from 12 December
: 2001), it only shows the last machine contacted, but on a more recent
: CURRENT it shows at least two of them. Is this a difference in the
: cards or in CURRENT?
It does it at the mac level, so only those mac addresses that you are
talking to will have entries. I routinely get 10 or so when I connect
via an access point.
: >>> One of the details about which Wes and I couldn't agree was whether an
: >>> IBSS can route to the outside world. I say yes, because any system in
: >>> the IBSS can have other interfaces as well. This isn't covered in the
: >>> 802.11 standard, of course. Wes says no, because the 802.11 standard
: >>> (available for free from
: >>> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.11-1999.pdf, which
: >>> is nevertheless a web page) says that interconnection only works with
: >>> BSS (i.e. managed) mode. I claim that this just refers to link-level
: >>> interconnection, and that IP routing has nothing to do with 802.11.
: >>> Comments welcome.
: >
: > IBSS is a mode that you need to do routing with. It won't bridge for
: > you. You need access point for that. Maybe that's what Wes is
: > talking about: the ability to put the access point on a network and
: > have it deal properly with bridging the traffic onto the lan.
:
: No, Wes was saying that the standard required an access point in order
: to connect to an external network at all, and the fact that I could do
: it without an access point was a coincidence which "shouldn't work".
That's not true. Either you misunderstood wes, or wes was confused.
: > Finally, a lot of stuff is in flux right now :-)
:
: I can't see anything significant in the drivers. For me, it Just
: Works.
The hostap stuff is in flux.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020503.175801.101616114.imp>