From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Young Subject: Re: WiMAX extensions Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 22:32:18 -0500 Message-ID: <20070513033218.GL20770@che.ojctech.com> References: <50721.65.74.1.247.1178691838.squirrel@webmail.cs.umd.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50721.65.74.1.247.1178691838.squirrel-2RFepEojUI1Vf4MZnIYnAze48wsgrGvP@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: radiotap-rN9S6JXhQ+WXmMXjJBpWqg@public.gmane.org List-Id: radiotap@radiotap.org On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 02:23:58AM -0400, Charles Clancy wrote: > What does the list think about adding WiMAX (IEEE 802.16) fields to the > Radiotap header? While the name is relatively generic, implying any sort > of radio, so far it's very WiFi-centric. Sounds ok to me. > I can put together a list of fields that it would be good to define, if > the list thinks this is an appropriate use for Radiotap. Yes, please. Dave -- David Young OJC Technologies dyoung-eZodSLrBbDpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933