Adding new MBIM extension CID?

Bjørn Mork bjorn at
Tue Mar 25 01:43:55 PDT 2014

Ben Chan <benchan at> 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  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

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


More information about the libmbim-devel mailing list