linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>,
	Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC V2] cfg80211: introduce critical protocol indication from user-space
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 23:44:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1364510646.10397.81.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1364510577.3226.7.camel@dcbw.foobar.com>

On Thu, 2013-03-28 at 17:42 -0500, Dan Williams wrote:

> > Well, you can do DHCP a second or so, I'd think? And EAPOL much quicker,
> > of course. I don't really see any reasonable minimum time? We might want
> > to enforce a max though, maybe.
> 
> Not quite.  A lot is dependent on the server itself, and I've had users
> on university and corporate networks report it sometimes takes 30 to 60
> seconds for the whole DHCP transaction to complete (DISCOVER, REQUEST,
> OFFER, ACK).  Sometimes there's a NAK in there if the server doesn't
> like your lease, which means you need another round-trip.  So in many
> cases, it's a couple round-trips and each of these packets may or may
> not get lost in noisy environments.

Oh, yes, of course. However, we're talking about optimising the good
cases, not the bad ones. Think of it this way: if it goes fast, we
shouldn't make it slow by putting things like powersave or similar in
the way. If it's slow, then it'll still work, just slower. But when
"slower" only means a few hundred milliseconds, it doesn't matter if
everything takes forever (30-60 secs)

johannes


  reply	other threads:[~2013-03-28 22:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-28 12:11 [RFC V2] cfg80211: introduce critical protocol indication from user-space Arend van Spriel
2013-03-28 16:17 ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-28 16:30   ` Ben Greear
2013-03-28 21:16   ` Arend van Spriel
2013-03-28 21:28     ` Johannes Berg
2013-03-28 22:42       ` Dan Williams
2013-03-28 22:44         ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2013-03-28 23:01           ` Dan Williams
2013-03-28 23:30             ` Ben Greear
2013-03-29 13:42               ` Arend van Spriel
2013-04-01 14:52               ` Dan Williams
2013-03-29 11:38           ` Arend van Spriel
2013-03-28 22:51         ` Ben Greear
2013-03-28 22:58           ` Dan Williams

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=1364510646.10397.81.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=adrian@freebsd.org \
    --cc=arend@broadcom.com \
    --cc=dcbw@redhat.com \
    --cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nbd@openwrt.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).