Adding new MBIM extension CID?

[Bjørn Mork]

Ben Chan <benchan at chromium.org> writes:

> The extensibility in MBIM is unavoidable for practical reasons but does
> come at a cost, IMHO. Let's hope subsequent MBIM specifications would
> standardize more common services, so that we don't end up having many
> versions of the same service, like we did to AT.

I worry that a new revision might not help.

Adding any new mandatory CIDs is going to be hard, so I think we can
rule that out as a generic solution.  And anything optional won't really
make a difference.  It's perfectly possible for one vendor to
standardize new services today, publish the spec and put it up on
http://compliance.usb.org/mbim/.  There is no need to make new services
proprietary, even if they are vendor specified.

Unfortunately, only Microsoft seems to understand this.  But that's
still somewhat good news.  There's a good chance they will want about
the same services we want, and they have the userspace application power
to *force* modem vendors into implementing their services. They actually
have a lot more to say than the USB-IF wrt any optional service and/or
CID...

Never thought I'd end up trusting Microsoft to help the Linux community
;-)


Bjørn