From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wopr.sciops.net ([216.126.196.60]) by ewsd; Thu Jan 23 16:53:57 EST 2020 Received: (qmail 48497 invoked by uid 1001); 23 Jan 2020 13:53:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:53:51 -0800 From: Kurt H Maier To: 9front@9front.org Subject: Re: [9front] wifi Message-ID: <20200123215351.GA10811@wopr> Mail-Followup-To: 9front@9front.org References: <9183FC59-A945-435B-9329-E352D12E984C@stanleylieber.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: scale-out self-healing method general-purpose backend On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 01:25:33PM -0800, hiro wrote: > should be only b/g > is band steering actually a part of any spec? does it actually require > anything special from a wifi station? band steering is not part of any standard. if it happens at all, it has to be the computer driving it, not the wifi device. generally speaking, drivers tend to prefer 5GHz, given identical configurations (essid, auth, vlans, etc) across both frequency bands. again, no device (to my knowledge) has this built-in, it's always done in software. My omniscience machine is broken, so I might be wrong. khm