Re: dhclient ignoring link on wi0

Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 19:03:17 -0500
> David Gilbert <dgilbert_at_dclg.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>>>>"Alexander" == Alexander Leidinger <Alexander_at_Leidinger.net> writes:
>>
>>[various problems with wi, deleted]
>>
>>Alexander> The problem is, that the wi driver isn't ported to the
>>Alexander> current WLAN infrastructure. There's no documentation
>>Alexander> available for the WLAN infrastructure, so you have to read
>>Alexander> the source (the ath driver is the de-facto reference driver
>>Alexander> for the WLAN stuff), search the net and if nothing helps,
>>Alexander> ask sam_at_FreeBSD.org some well thought questions.
>>
>>I also thought that someone might have comments about a wi0 as an
>>access point.  This used to work, but all clients (even windoze) seem
>>to loose association every 20 to 40 minutes (although the timing is
>>random it seems).
> 
> 
> I'm sure this is just another problem related to the outdated WLAN part
> of wi.

Sigh, I can't take any more of this nonsense.  wi was one of the first 
drivers moved over to use net80211.  It is not using "outdated WLAN" 
code.  The problems with wi are almost entirely due to my being coerced 
into bringing updated net80211 code before all the drivers (other than 
ath) were ready.  I did this because I was PROMISED (in person) that wi 
would be maintained and any problems fixed as they arose.  That did not 
happen and ever since wi has languished.  I have several wi cards and I 
test them each time I make changes to the net80211 layer to make sure 
there are no regressions but there are known outstanding problems that I 
am unlikely to work on.  Find someone that cares and I will help them 
(as I've said numerous times).

> 
> 
>>Alexander> If you have the time and energy to have a look at porting
>>Alexander> the wi driver to (at least parts of) the current WLAN
>>Alexander> framework, all wi users would appreciate some patches...
>>
>>Not that I'm afraid of development, but I'm unfamilliar with the
>>difference between the revisions of acceptable wifi behaviour.
> 
> 
> There are maybe 2 or 3 people in the FreeBSD world which are (at least
> partly) familiar with it. And all of them aren't interested or don't
> have time to take care of wi (or think the wi technology is outdated
> and should RIP).

There are many people capable of dealing with these issues but most are 
smart enough to recognize that there is little to be gained by hacking 
on a driver for hardware that is out of date and can be replaced for the 
price of a cheap dinner.

> 
> So it comes down to "someone with interest in wi has to make himself
> familiar with the WLAN infrastructure". I'm sure Sam will answer
> questions if the person attacking the problem stumbles upon some
> questions regarding the WLAN infrastructure part.

	Sam