From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: Catalin Drula <catalin@cs.toronto.edu>
Cc: BlueZ Mailing List <bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: [Bluez-devel] Re: Re: Re: Lower granularity for INQUIRY interval
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 09:15:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1108109727.18099.7.camel@pegasus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0502110245280.20071@qew.cs>
Hi Catalin,
> > > Not necessarily a bad idea. In my case, I need to do symmetric
> > > Bluetooth discovery. There are no predefined roles (master-slave,
> > > server-client) for the devices which must continually scan their
> > > surroundings in order to discover other devices. Hence, each device
> > > must continously switch between the INQUIRY and INQUIRY SCAN states
> >
> > I still don"t get why switching inquiry scan on and off should help in
> > any case. Since inquiry scan defines the discoverable mode and so you
> > switch devices to unvisible when they inquiry and back to visible when
> > they don"t.
>
> I never switch inquiry scan off (the scan mode always stays PSCAN and
> ISCAN). But when an inquiry is initiated, the device switches into INQUIRY
> mode (or substate) from stops scanning (moves out of the INQUIRY SCAN
> substate for the duration of the inquiry). That is to say, during an
> inquiry a device is not discoverable (or visible). That is what I meant by
> switching between the two states.
in the code you sent me, you did exactly this. So what are we talking
about?
Regards
Marcel
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
Bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-11 8:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-11 7:54 Re: Re: Lower granularity for INQUIRY interval Catalin Drula
2005-02-11 8:15 ` Marcel Holtmann [this message]
2005-02-11 9:00 ` Catalin Drula
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1108109727.18099.7.camel@pegasus \
--to=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=bluez-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=catalin@cs.toronto.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.