Are there any big reasons not to choose ral(4) over ath(4) for a host
ap? I've been trying out three wireless cards on -current as host access
points. So far it seems that ral(4) works better, but is quite weak on
the overall range in mode 11g as compared to 11a.
One message earlier on misc suggested ral(4) as better for an access
point. [2] The info on Wikipedia about drivers[3], if it's accurate,
suggests that ral has more help from the vendors.
Regards,
/Lars
[1] ath0 at pci0 dev 17 function 0 "Atheros AR5413" rev 0x01: irq 15
ath0: AR5413 10.5 phy 6.1 rf 6.3, ETSI1W, address 00:15:61:x:x:x
ath0 at pci0 dev 17 function 0 "Atheros AR5212" rev 0x01: irq 15
ath0: AR5213A 5.9 phy 4.3 rf5112a 3.6, FCC2A*, address a8:54:b2:x:x:x
ral0 at pci0 dev 17 function 0 "Ralink RT2561S" rev 0x00: irq 15,
address
00:12:0e:x:x:x
ral0: MAC/BBP RT2561C, RF RT5225
[2] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&w=2&r=1&s=ral+or+ath&q=b
[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open-source_wireless_drivers#OpenBSD
