Lets make wifi fast again!
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
To: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Cc: dpreed@reed.com, make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net,
	bufferbloat-fcc-discuss
	<bufferbloat-fcc-discuss@lists.redbarn.org>,
	cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] arstechnica confirmstp-link router lockdown
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 12:07:01 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1603141204191.25586@nftneq.ynat.uz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7E8F9D99-38F8-47CD-960E-45100844B161@gmail.com>

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Jonathan Morton wrote:

>> On 14 Mar, 2016, at 16:02, dpreed@reed.com wrote:
>>
>> The WiFi protocols themselves are not a worry of the FCC at all. Modifying 
>> them in software is ok. Just the physical emissions spectrum must be 
>> certified not to be exceeded.
>>
>> So as a practical matter, one could even satisfy this rule with an external 
>> filter and power limiter alone, except in part of the 5 GHz band where radios 
>> must turn off if a radar is detected by a specified algorithm.
>>
>> That means that the radio software itself could be tasked with a software 
>> filter in the D/A converter that is burned into the chip, and not bypassable. 
>> If the update path requires a key that is secret, that should be enough, as 
>> key based updating is fine for all radios sold for other uses that use 
>> digital modulation using DSP.
>>
>> So the problem is that 802.11 chips don't split out the two functions, making 
>> one hard to update.
>
> To put this another way, what we need is a cleaner separation of ISO Layers 1 
> (physical) and 2 (MAC).

The problem is that everything (not just in wifi chips, think about 'software 
defined networking/datacenter) is moving towards less separation of the 
different layers, not more. The benefits of less separation are far more 
flexibility, lower costs, and in some cases, the ability to do things that 
weren't possible with the separation.

Any position that requires bucking this trend is going to have a very hard time 
surviving.

David Lang

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-03-14 19:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-14 14:02 dpreed
2016-03-14 14:14 ` Jonathan Morton
     [not found]   ` <CAEfCu-oCfO+FfdLjpZDSwQmZ7-Mc+X4vDvzZMNrnp+p8ut8OKQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-14 16:23     ` [Make-wifi-fast] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] [Cerowrt-devel] " Adrian Chadd
2016-03-14 17:49     ` dpreed
2016-03-14 19:04       ` David Lang
2016-03-14 19:07   ` David Lang [this message]
2016-03-14 19:13 ` [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] " David Lang
     [not found]   ` <CAEfCu-pGdkcqHJMHSiXtXBcx=m0XyskVOLmGjC2esS+SY+GgcQ@mail.gmail.com>
2016-03-14 22:29     ` [Make-wifi-fast] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] [Cerowrt-devel] " David Lang
2016-03-15  3:47 [Make-wifi-fast] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] [Cerowrt-devel]arstechnica " dpreed
2016-03-15  9:38 ` [Make-wifi-fast] [Cerowrt-devel] [bufferbloat-fcc-discuss] arstechnica " Jonathan Morton

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

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/make-wifi-fast.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.02.1603141204191.25586@nftneq.ynat.uz \
    --to=david@lang.hm \
    --cc=bufferbloat-fcc-discuss@lists.redbarn.org \
    --cc=cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    --cc=chromatix99@gmail.com \
    --cc=dpreed@reed.com \
    --cc=make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /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