On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Marcus D. Leech <mle...@ripnet.com> wrote:
> George, >> >> >> I do think we need something like what you have suggested but I am still >> a bit puzzled about the right way of implementing it. >> >> Best regards, >> Andre >> >> I think a more fundamental issue is that "carrier sense" isn't actually > defined in any kind of general way. Certainly for *some* types of > PHYs, you can do simple energy-presence detection. But usually, it's > more complicated than that, and it varies widely from PHY to > PHY. In some, you'll need to run a correlator before you even know > whether the channel is busy or not. In others, simple energy > detection works. > > I don't think there's a general-purpose way of doing this, but that's just > my POV. > > Definitely, there are MACs whose form of carrier sense is detecting preamble rather than detecting energy. In my same piece of work, we put a matched filter in the FPGA and the host specifies the coefficients of the match filter, then you gate on that. But, I don't think it's unreasonable to think basic energy detection is not general purpose enough? I think supporting some basic form of energy detection would start to enable better MAC implementations... and afterwards I have every intention of rolling a match filter in to the FPGA also. So, maybe your suggestion is I build a separate FPGA implementation if people want MAC functionality. I can do that if people believe that the functionality is not general enough.
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
