On 02/25/2011 08:54 PM, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 09:08 -0800, Thomas Andrews wrote: >> On 02/25/2011 06:15 PM, Mohammed Shafi wrote: >>> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Thomas Andrews<tandr...@grok.co.za> >>> wrote: >>>> Is DELAYED-BA implemented? >>> >>> need to check it out. Can you please explain what are you trying to do ? >> >> I am using ath9k as both STA and AP. What I'm trying to do is get the >> devices (AR9280) to stop acknowledging every frame but rather >> acknowledge a block of frames. I want to do this to see if I can >> increase the efficiency of the MAC. > > Is there any particular reason for you to look at the delayed block ack > mechanism instead of immediate block ack? Both of these allow a block of > frames to be acknowledged without having to acknowledge each frame with > a separate frame. Unlike the delayed BA, the implicit one is mandatory > for HT and supported by ath9k.
I am working under the assumption that each frame is currently being acknowledged, and I was trying to improve on that. My assumption is purely based upon calculated throughput attainable with and without per-frame acknowledge. If there is a way to find out what is actually being acknowledged, I would be keen to know, as I don't know how to do that. Many thanks, Thomas _______________________________________________ ath9k-devel mailing list ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
