From: David Young <dyoung-e+AXbWqSrlAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: radiotap-eZodSLrBbDpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org
Subject: RFC: moving Radiotap forward
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 16:48:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070716214820.GD19812@che.ojctech.com> (raw)
I have written some proposals and desires for moving Radiotap forward.
1 This list will "keep" the Radiotap standard. That is, this is the venue
at which to propose new fields for discussion and eventual adoption.
We will adopt new fields into the standard when there is "rough
consensus and running code." Let's strive for general agreement of the
list membership, at least one driver and at least one packet capture
tool that groks a new field.
The list membership needs to be representative of folks who have
a stake in Radiotap, especially developers of device drivers
for Linux, OpenSolaris, *BSD, et cetera, and developers of packet
capture/filter/dissection/display software such as WireShark, libpcap,
Kismet, and TCPDump. "Are we all here?"
2 The Radiotap documentation needs to appear on "neutral ground" on the
web---i.e., not in a NetBSD manual page. Web resources need to be
"beefed up" to include a careful specification, lists of assigned
numbers, examples, reference implementations, and tests. I have
reserved a couple of Radiotap domain names to hold that information.
Radiotap needs a volunteer web admin.
3 We need to set minimum requirements for a field, such as specifying
its width, alignment, name, and interpretation.
4 We need to prioritize arresting Radiotap fragmentation. I do not know
if we can reconcile the conflicting uses for bits 14 and upward, but
I hope Radiotap stakeholders can be reconciled with our introduction
of a consensus process.
5 It seems to me that we need to decide
Will we adopt fields for WiMax? Do we have enough people both with a
stake and with expertise in WiMax to do that?
Do we / how will we support vendor-specific fields?
Dave
--
David Young OJC Technologies
dyoung-eZodSLrBbDpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24
next reply other threads:[~2007-07-16 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-16 21:48 David Young [this message]
[not found] ` <20070716214820.GD19812-eZ+MEZF6i8Dc+919tysfdA@public.gmane.org>
2007-07-18 20:30 ` RFC: moving Radiotap forward Charles Clancy
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070716214820.GD19812@che.ojctech.com \
--to=dyoung-e+axbwqsrlaavxtiumwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=radiotap-eZodSLrBbDpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).