<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><br><div><div>Am 11.12.2013 um 14:40 schrieb Felix Fietkau <<a href="mailto:nbd@openwrt.org">nbd@openwrt.org</a>>:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On 2013-12-10 09:33, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://cs.ucsb.edu/~laradeek/Secon13.pdf">http://cs.ucsb.edu/~laradeek/Secon13.pdf</a><br></blockquote><br>Do you understand why ARAMIS with training performs so much better than <br>Minstrel in the<br>20 MHz interferer case?<br></blockquote>One reason could be that the tests were made using the ancient 2.6.32<br>kernel. I've added many improvements and fixes to minstrel_ht since that<br>release.<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Iw as quite surprised why certain system research publications do still not provide sufficient information that enables someone to repeat their experiments. What version of the mac80211 subsystem did they used ? The reference just states: <span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.0656px;">[6] Minstrel HT Linux Wireless, ”<a href="http://linuxwireless.or">http://linuxwireless.or</a></span><span style="font-family: serif; font-size: 18.0656px;">g/en/developers”</span></div><div>Unfortunately there are many system relevant papers within networking that do not provide sufficient citations and experiment descriptions about software version (e.g. GIT hash), date, ect.</div><div>It appears to me that also reviewers do not put enough value to that. </div><div><br></div><div>Thomas</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote type="cite">- Felix<br>_______________________________________________<br>Bloat mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net">Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>