On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 11:55 +0200, Ralf Wierse wrote: > Pavel, > thank you very much for your answer, I understand your point. > > we might decide to implement Turbo-G ourselves since we have a linux > based product and our (single) customer is wanting this feature. > > Would you recommend to start on Madwifi or on ATH5k?
It depends on your timeframe and goals. With MadWifi, you start with more advanced code, but it's never going to be in the kernel. Besides, the non-free code will be standing in your way. With ath5k, you can work with other wireless developers and your code may be applicable to other hardware. You won't be bound by HAL, but you may need to reverse engineer the functionality you need. > Does ath5k support AR5006XS (with single chip AR5414) good enough? > (we are still using Madwifi) As far as I know, it's not supported, but the work is underway. > What about the bonding feature, that's not really proprietary, is it? I believe it's a part of the forthcoming 802.11n standard, so you may see more interest from developers working with other chipsets. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ ath5k-devel mailing list ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
