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
