From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Roskin Subject: Re: use of radiotap bit 14? Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:47:08 -0400 Message-ID: <1188571628.24684.7.camel@dv> References: <1188512214.7585.3.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <1188512214.7585.3.camel-YfaajirXv214zXjbi5bjpg@public.gmane.org> Sender: radiotap-admin-rN9S6JXhQ+WXmMXjJBpWqg@public.gmane.org Errors-To: radiotap-admin-rN9S6JXhQ+WXmMXjJBpWqg@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Johannes Berg Cc: Gerald Combs , radiotap List-Id: radiotap@radiotap.org On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 00:16 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > Our radiotap header in Linux defines bit 14 as > IEEE80211_RADIOTAP_RX_FLAGS; however running wireshark on it tells me > that this bit means "FCS in header". Does anybody know which use is > correct, if any? As far as I know, "FCS in header" is a FreeBSD thing, which came to Linux in MadWifi. "Rx flags" comes from Linux Libertas driver. The standard uses the later: http://netbsd.gw.com/cgi-bin/man-cgi?ieee80211_radiotap+9+NetBSD-current MadWifi has removed the non-standard use of bit 14. Now it's time to fix wireshark. > Maybe we should simply skip to bit 32 or something and start redefining > things properly? And what would be "properly"? How would it prevent drivers from adding non-standard fields? -- Regards, Pavel Roskin