[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4f5398e8-302f-40e7-b718-decade935f4d@green-communications.fr>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 11:57:10 +0200
From: Nicolas Cavallari <nicolas.cavallari@...en-communications.fr>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
Ramanathan Choodamani <quic_rchoodam@...cinc.com>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ath12k@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [DESIGN RFC] wifi: Robust AV streaming Design Proposal for AP
On 25/06/2025 00:31, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 6/24/25 13:57, Ramanathan Choodamani wrote:
>> ===================================
>> Robust AV streaming protocols - QoS
>> ===================================
>>
>> The Robust AV stream protocols are mobile centric protocols - meaning
>> they
>> are initiated by a non-AP STA to the AP. These protocols are implemented
>> at the Access Point (AP) to classify packets sent to the non-AP STA
>> which requests
>> classification using action frames. The non-AP STA initiates Robust AV
>> streaming
>> action frames requesting for specific classification for the IP packets
>> destined to the non-AP STA from the AP. These parameters can be
>> negotiated by both
>> AP and non-AP STA.
>>
>> Upon successful handshake, The AP classifies incoming individually
>> addressed MSDUs
>> (Mac Service Data Unit) based upon parameters provided by the non-AP
>> STA or
>> notifies the non-AP STA to transmit MSDUs with preferred parameters
>> based upon
>> what was exchanged.
>>
>> Robust AV streaming improves AV (Audio and Video) streaming
>> performance when
>> using IEEE Std 802.11 for consumer and enterprise applications.
>>
>> Let's look at the Robust AV streaming protocols which are implemented
>> as a
>> part of this design.
>
> Thank you for posting this and for the beautiful ascii diagrams!
>
> Since this will be poking netfilter rules into the kernel,
> is there a good way to clean up all rules created by a previous
> hostapd process in case hostapd crashes or is killed hard and
> cannot do its own cleanup? Maybe the rules could have some
> special marking that is configurable per hostapd (or per AP or BSS or
> something)
nftables has an optional "table owner" mechanism that destroys a table
if the netlink socket that created it is closed. Just like nl80211
connection owner for vifs.
keyword: NFT_TABLE_F_OWNER
Powered by blists - more mailing lists