Problem with BSS properties
sleffler at google.com
Sat Dec 26 14:29:31 EST 2009
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Jouni Malinen <j at w1.fi> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 03:13:34PM -0800, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> > The other thing are the quality and noise properties. Do you still want
> > these? Or can we just go for a signal property showing the dBm value
> > like iw scan does. I don't see any extra value in keeping deprecated
> > values in the new API.
> Please lets get rid of them. One signal strength value that could be
> trusted to contain some useful data is much better than three with
> semi-random values no one can figure out.. Quality has never been
> defined properly and noise is not even a property of a BSS (it is per
> channel and should not have been mixed with scan results in the first
I think dropping noise floor is a bad idea unless you add another mechanism
at the same time to get it (is there a mechanism in the new d-bus api?).
The quality parameter has never been useful IMO and dropping it would make
> > Do you think a "Display" or "Name" property showing the SSID in
> > converted UTF-8 would be useful. Or should the clients do that
> > translation?
> I would love to have this, but I do agree that it is next to impossible
> to get this right in all cases.
I agree w/ not doing translation in the supplicant. In my world this work
is part of the UI and unless we push state down into the supplicant it
cannot do as good a job.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the HostAP