Hi,
* Stefan Sperling wrote:
>
> This diff has no effect on management frames; it only affects transmit
> rate of data frames while in assocated state; association state is
> kept alive by received frames, not by frames being sent.
>
> I don't see how the diff could be causing either of your
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 05:33:41PM +0200, Matthias Schmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:01:58PM +0200, Matthias Schmidt wrote:
> > > Hi Stefan,
> > >
> > > * Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Since I am knee-deep in Tx aggregation right now, I
Hi,
* Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:01:58PM +0200, Matthias Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > * Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > >
> > > Since I am knee-deep in Tx aggregation right now, I would like to delegate
> > > testing of the diff below against plain -current to the
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 01:01:58PM +0200, Matthias Schmidt wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> * Stefan Sperling wrote:
> >
> > Since I am knee-deep in Tx aggregation right now, I would like to delegate
> > testing of the diff below against plain -current to the community.
> > If some of you could test the
Hi Stefan,
* Stefan Sperling wrote:
>
> Since I am knee-deep in Tx aggregation right now, I would like to delegate
> testing of the diff below against plain -current to the community.
> If some of you could test the diff below and report back to me I would
> appreciate it.
> You don't need to
While working on Tx aggregation I noticed that TCP streams will start
stalling whenever MiRa decides to start sending frames at Tx rates
which the AP tends to fail to receive. This means we're dropping far
too many frames while trying to find an optimal Tx rate to use.
The problem can be observed
