11h IE conflicts with 11s

11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Tomas Winkler]

I found this conflict in information elements in curse of 11h implementation

enum ieee80211_eid {
WLAN_EID_MESH_CONFIG = 36,      /* Pending IEEE 802.11 ANA approval */
WLAN_EID_MESH_ID = 37,          /* Pending IEEE 802.11 ANA approval */

WLAN_EID_SUPPORTED_CHANNELS = 36,
WLAN_EID_CHANNEL_SWITCH = 37,
}

I finding it very unlikely that this IDs will be assigned to MESH IEs
as 11h is already approved.
Currently this makes the 11h implementation let say difficult....

Thanks
Tomas

Re: 11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 778 bytes --]


> I found this conflict in information elements in curse of 11h implementation
> 
> enum ieee80211_eid {
> WLAN_EID_MESH_CONFIG = 36,      /* Pending IEEE 802.11 ANA approval */
> WLAN_EID_MESH_ID = 37,          /* Pending IEEE 802.11 ANA approval */
> 
> WLAN_EID_SUPPORTED_CHANNELS = 36,
> WLAN_EID_CHANNEL_SWITCH = 37,
> }
> 
> I finding it very unlikely that this IDs will be assigned to MESH IEs
> as 11h is already approved.

Heh. Interesting. I just looked at the ANA spreadsheet
(11-08-0227-00-0000-ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls) and there TGs
doesn't even have any tentative assignments although all other TGs do.
But TGh is still listed there rather than being subsumed into
802.11-2007, what's up with that? Is there a new TGh?

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: 11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Tomas Winkler]
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Re: 11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Luis Carlos Cobo]

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 03:23 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> It's in 7.3.2 table 20 in 11h draft I have here and in table 26 in
> 11ma (unified version)
> These numbers are being used for few years already. This is what for
> example Cisco APs are using
> so I have strong feeling it won't change.
> 
> Not sure why you are looking for it in 11n spec
> 
> I suggest we renumber MESH stuff.

I agree, will try to send a patch tomorrow.

-- 
Luis Carlos Cobo Rus       GnuPG ID: 44019B60
cozybit Inc.

Re: 11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 784 bytes --]


> >  Heh. Interesting. I just looked at the ANA spreadsheet
> >  (11-08-0227-00-0000-ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls) and there TGs
> >  doesn't even have any tentative assignments although all other TGs do.
> >  But TGh is still listed there rather than being subsumed into
> >  802.11-2007, what's up with that? Is there a new TGh?
> >
> It's in 7.3.2 table 20 in 11h draft I have here and in table 26 in
> 11ma (unified version)

802.11-2007 has been published :) It's table 7-26 there as well, of
course.

> These numbers are being used for few years already. This is what for
> example Cisco APs are using
> so I have strong feeling it won't change.

Heh yeah.

> Not sure why you are looking for it in 11n spec

Where did I say 11n? Huh?

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]

Re: 11h IE conflicts with 11s

[Brian Morrison]

Johannes Berg wrote:
>>>  Heh. Interesting. I just looked at the ANA spreadsheet
>>>  (=EF=BB=BF11-08-0227-00-0000-ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls) an=
d there TGs
>>>  doesn't even have any tentative assignments although all other TGs=
 do.
>>>  But TGh is still listed there rather than being subsumed into
>>>  802.11-2007, what's up with that? Is there a new TGh?
>>>
>> It's in 7.3.2 table 20 in 11h draft I have here and in table 26 in
>> 11ma (unified version)
>=20
> 802.11-2007 has been published :) It's table 7-26 there as well, of
> course.
>=20
>> These numbers are being used for few years already. This is what for
>> example Cisco APs are using
>> so I have strong feeling it won't change.
>=20
> Heh yeah.
>=20
>> Not sure why you are looking for it in 11n spec
>=20
> Where did I say 11n? Huh?

It was my mistake, I was referring to 802.11s but for some reason wrote=
 n.

I looked at 802.11s Draft 2.0. It shows that these information element
IDs are all waiting ANA approval, the Mesh Configuration and Mesh ID ar=
e
shown as <ANA 33> and <ANA 34> respectively. What these numbers will
eventually be I don't know, the <ANA nn> designations are simply
sequential from the first one to the last one shown in the document, so
they may not actually end up as being sequential numbers.

Is this information of any help to you?

--=20

Brian

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireles=
s" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html