Let's see if my message makes it through the filters this time...
============ Forwarded message ============ From : Denis Ovsienko <de...@ovsienko.info> To : "tcpdump-workers"<tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org> Date : Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:07:58 +0100 Subject : about bits and frequencies ============ Forwarded message ============ > Hello list. > > I cannot recall the exact discussion, but I vaguely remember a couple years > ago somebody (Guy Harris?) writing something like: > > - In this encoding this field tells, in units of x kHz, the frequency of the > wireless channel, this is the maximum frequency (20GHz???) it can represent > given this amount of bits, is it enough or should it be bigger? > > ...and I answered something like: > > - Off-the-shelf WiFi runs on 5GHz, satellite downlinks are 10-20 GHz and I > read about people experimenting in the bands up to 100GHz, so it would be > future-proof to have more bits in that field. > > Recently I have seen $100 wireless access points in the 60GHz band, so some > of those additional bits already can be put to a good use. > > -- > Denis Ovsienko > > -- Denis Ovsienko _______________________________________________ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers