From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailrelay002.isp.belgacom.be (mailrelay002.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.175]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D5E21F462 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 10:11:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Belgacom-Dynamic: yes X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsEIAHB591NR9ITJ/2dsb2JhbABQCYMNuAWaMIMZBAIBgQ4Xd4QEAQVWBhgEEQsLDQkWDwkDAgECAREWHhMIAQEXiBIBGAGxPI0yChmBGoQzF45xYhaENgEEkiSKJYcvjV2DYDuCfgEBAQ Received: from 201.132-244-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be (HELO zotac.xperim.be) ([81.244.132.201]) by relay.skynet.be with ESMTP; 22 Aug 2014 19:11:50 +0200 Received: from [192.168.1.172] (mordor.xperim.be [192.168.1.172]) by zotac.xperim.be (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2ubuntu2.1) with ESMTP id s7MH70JF022151 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 19:07:00 +0200 Message-ID: <53F778B4.6000906@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 19:07:00 +0200 From: Jan Ceuleers User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <91696A3A-EF44-4A1A-8070-D3AF25D0D9AC@netapp.com> <20140821114616.36c0142f@redhat.com> <20140821195735.GA1719@sesse.net> In-Reply-To: <20140821195735.GA1719@sesse.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bloat] sigcomm wifi X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 17:11:53 -0000 On 08/21/2014 09:57 PM, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > I'll stop preaching the Cisco gospel soon (well, e.g. Aruba would probably > also do just the same thing :-) ), but in a WLC-based solution, there's a > setting to just refuse the first few associations on 2.4 GHz if it detects > the client is 5 GHz capable. It's a hack, but it pushes people over to 5 GHz > quite effectively. How does that work in the light of STA MAC address randomisation during the scan stage? As I understand it, such STAs only use their "real" MAC address for actually connecting to the AP, but hide their identity in probe requests. So a dual-band AP can't rely on a STA's MAC address being the same in both bands.