The two ATH WLAN devices we want to bond together don't see/interfere each others. It is a very funny and special configuration, one can consider it as two physically separated point2point radio beam links.
Now you might understand why we want turbo-g on each device and bond two of those devices together (results in 216Mbps gross rate talking marketing minded). > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Bruno Randolf > Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:40 PM > To: ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org > Cc: Ralf Wierse > Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] Turbo-G and Bonding with ATH5K > > > On Thursday 10 July 2008 13:33:28 Ralf Wierse wrote: > > Pavel, > > may I call you one more time, please. > > > > The existing bonding functionality uses MII interface towards > > two network devices > > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/marcelo/linux-2. > 4/Documentati > >on/networking/bonding.txt > > > > Does standard MII belong to the plans for ath5k? > > standard bonding can't work with wireless devices since it > uses the same MAC > address for all involved network interfaces. this usually > breaks associations > and creates confusion between stations. i guess that the > bonding code could > be changed for wireless though... > > bruno > > > Thanks > > Ralf > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Pavel Roskin > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 5:16 AM > > > To: Ralf Wierse > > > Cc: ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org > > > Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] Turbo-G and Bonding with ATH5K > > > > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ath5k-devel mailing list > > ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org > > https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > ath5k-devel mailing list > ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org > https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel _______________________________________________ ath5k-devel mailing list ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
