Re: wireless: recap of current issues (configuration)

[Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>]

On Jan 17, 2006, at 13:41, Stuffed Crust wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 10:24:41PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
>> If I have told my equipment to obey UK law I expect it to do so.  
>> If I hop on the train to France and forget to revise my  
>> configuration I'd prefer it also believed the APs
>
> It's not that you might forget to revise your configuration, but  
> that the vast majority of users will not revise anything, and still  
> expect things to "just work".  Kind of like multi-band cell phones.

Alan's point is still very valid.  From a poweruser point of view, if  
I specifically tell my wireless client "You must obey US laws", and  
then I wander over past a broken imported AP, I don't want my client  
to _expand_ its allowable range.  IMHO, userspace should be able to  
forcibly restrict wireless frequencies to a certain regdomain (or  
leave unrestricted and passive-scan-only), and specify how AP/ 
configured regdomains act.  Given the range of possibilities, I think  
that a userspace daemon monitoring events and dynamically configuring  
the useable frequencies would best.  That way the userspace daemon  
could be configured to ignore APs, union/intersect the APs with the  
configured regdomain, ignore the configured regdomain in the presence  
of APs, etc.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

--
I lost interest in "blade servers" when I found they didn't throw  
knives at people who weren't supposed to be in your machine room.
   -- Anthony de Boer