Send connman mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of connman digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: [Question]: Scan schedule (M?ns Zigher)
2. RE: [PATCH] ipconfig: Incase of Manual IP Configuration,
saving Gateway information during network switch (Rahul Jain)
3. Re: [Question]: Scan schedule (Julien Massot)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 06:23:05 +0200
From: M?ns Zigher <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Question]: Scan schedule
Message-ID:
<caehqi8m1zzkrramy48utaufrftl0psjqvwa7ghrom1e-t+c...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your time I appreciate it. On our target what I can see is that
if I let connman/wpa_supplicant manage the scanning I end up with an empty
list frequently which then causes my application to fail since it cannot
find the service to connect to. Is this is a bug or is this a situation
that my application need to take into consideration and if so the action to
take is to trigger a scan?
BR
M?ns Zigher
Den l?r 25 aug. 2018 kl 17:14 skrev Daniel Wagner <[email protected]>:
> Hi M?ns,
>
> On 08/23/2018 11:44 AM, M?ns Zigher wrote:
> > I am developing an application that is using the dbus api. The
> > application will setup the wifi for the unit. I am struggling a bit to
> > see the best practice for making sure we have fully updated list of
> > services. I know I can configure connman to automatically scan by
> > using BackgroundScanning which is by default set to true. Is the best
> > practice to let connman manage the scanning or should my application
> > trigger a scan whenever needed. The default scan schedule for connman is
> > not enough as I see it but I know you can setup a scan schedule in
> > wpa_supplicant but it looks like connman is starting wpa_supplicant so I
> > am not sure how to change this default scan schedule that connman is
> > setting up. Any comments are appreciated.
>
> The theory is that the application/user shouldn't worry about scanning.
> Even ConnMan shouldn't worry about this. Unfortunately, wpa_supplicant
> doesn't do the full job. That's why ConnMan's wpa_supplicant plugin is
> so complex (a mess).
>
> Obviously, there are scenarios where you want to tell ConnMan do a scan
> now. But you should not constantly tell ConnMan to do a scan. I am sure
> this will have some nasty side effects.
>
> Alternatively, you could give iwd a try. Though the current plugin is
> only supported the very basic stuff. Needs some more work.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.01.org/pipermail/connman/attachments/20180827/0272ab55/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 14:59:32 +0530
From: Rahul Jain <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: AMIT KUMAR JAISWAL <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ipconfig: Incase of Manual IP Configuration,
saving Gateway information during network switch
Message-ID:
<20180827092932epcms5p5b5c413078858edfd139283764e8ce9cf@epcms5p5>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear Daniel,
Please find my inputs for your question:-
[Q]Does the initial network have a proper configuration, that is it contains a
valid gateway? If so why is it missing when we reach
__connman_ipfconfig_save()? Do we call __connman_ipconfig_save() too late?
[A] Scenario:
1. User configured manual IP configuration in wired network with valid details
(IP, Gateway, DNS etc)
>> Yes, wired network has proper configuration and connection was successful.
2. Now, user switches from wired to wireless and wireless connection successful.
>> As during wired network disconnection, __connman_connection_gateway_remove()
>> will be called with type 3 (IPv4 + IPv6), where do_ipv4 = do_ipv6 = true; ->
>> g_hash_table_remove(gateway_hash, service); -> remove_gateway() will make
>> gateway null.
Immediately, when service_save()->__connman_ipconfig_save() is called for wired
service,at that time, as gateway is null, so valid gateway which was stored
already inside /var/lib/connman will be deleted.
As per your question, yes __connman_ipconfig_save is being called after
__connman_connection_gateway_remove().
3. Now, user switches from wireless to wired.
>> As stored profile inside /var/lib/connman doesn't have gateway, so wired
>> connection will fail.
Please let us know your opinion.
?
?
Thanks?
Rahul Jain?|?SRI-Delhi-Platform S/W 2 Team?
*[email protected]?|?( +91-99101-84111
?
?
--------- Original Message ---------
Sender : [email protected]?<[email protected]>
Date : 2018-08-26 00:30 (GMT+5:30)
Title : connman Digest, Vol 34, Issue 14
?
Send?connman?mailing?list?submissions?to
[email protected]
?
To?subscribe?or?unsubscribe?via?the?World?Wide?Web,?visit
????????https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
or,?via?email,?send?a?message?with?subject?or?body?'help'?to
[email protected]
?
You?can?reach?the?person?managing?the?list?at
[email protected]
?
When?replying,?please?edit?your?Subject?line?so?it?is?more?specific
than?"Re:?Contents?of?connman?digest..."
?
?
Today's?Topics:
?
???1.?Re:?[Question]:?Scan?schedule?(Daniel?Wagner)
???2.?Re:?[PATCH]?ipconfig:?Incase?of?Manual?IP?Configuration,
??????saving?Gateway?information?during?network?switch?(Daniel?Wagner)
???3.?Re:?[PATCH]?[dnsproxy]?Simplified?udp_server_event()
??????(Daniel?Wagner)
?
?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
?
Message:?1
Date:?Sat,?25?Aug?2018?17:14:34?+0200
From:?Daniel?Wagner?<[email protected]>
To:?M?ns?Zigher?<[email protected]>
Cc:[email protected]
Subject:?Re:?[Question]:?Scan?schedule
Message-ID:?<[email protected]>
Content-Type:?text/plain;?charset=utf-8;?format=flowed
?
Hi?M?ns,
?
On?08/23/2018?11:44?AM,?M?ns?Zigher?wrote:
>?I?am?developing?an?application?that?is?using?the?dbus?api.?The?
>?application?will?setup?the?wifi?for?the?unit.?I?am?struggling?a?bit?to?
>?see?the?best?practice?for?making?sure?we?have?fully?updated?list?of?
>?services.?I?know?I?can?configure?connman?to?automatically?scan?by?
>?using?BackgroundScanning?which?is?by?default?set?to?true.?Is?the?best?
>?practice?to?let?connman?manage?the?scanning?or?should?my?application?
>?trigger?a?scan?whenever?needed.?The?default?scan?schedule?for?connman?is?
>?not?enough?as?I?see?it?but?I?know?you?can?setup?a?scan?schedule?in?
>?wpa_supplicant?but?it?looks?like?connman?is?starting?wpa_supplicant?so?I?
>?am?not?sure?how?to?change?this?default?scan?schedule?that?connman?is?
>?setting?up.?Any?comments?are?appreciated.
?
The?theory?is?that?the?application/user?shouldn't?worry?about?scanning.?
Even?ConnMan?shouldn't?worry?about?this.?Unfortunately,?wpa_supplicant?
doesn't?do?the?full?job.?That's?why?ConnMan's?wpa_supplicant?plugin?is?
so?complex?(a?mess).
?
Obviously,?there?are?scenarios?where?you?want?to?tell?ConnMan?do?a?scan?
now.?But?you?should?not?constantly?tell?ConnMan?to?do?a?scan.?I?am?sure?
this?will?have?some?nasty?side?effects.
?
Alternatively,?you?could?give?iwd?a?try.?Though?the?current?plugin?is?
only?supported?the?very?basic?stuff.?Needs?some?more?work.
?
Thanks,
Daniel
?
?
------------------------------
?
Message:?2
Date:?Sat,?25?Aug?2018?17:50:12?+0200
From:?Daniel?Wagner?<[email protected]>
To:[email protected]
Cc:?"[email protected]"?<[email protected]>,?AMIT?KUMAR?JAISWAL
????????<[email protected]>,?Craig?McQueen
????????<[email protected]>
Subject:?Re:?[PATCH]?ipconfig:?Incase?of?Manual?IP?Configuration,
????????saving?Gateway?information?during?network?switch
Message-ID:?<[email protected]>
Content-Type:?text/plain;?charset=utf-8;?format=flowed
?
Hi?Rahul,
?
You?getting?better?with?the?patch?submission.?I?really?appreciate?your?
effort!
?
On?08/23/2018?01:55?PM,?Rahul?Jain?wrote:
>?Subject:?[PATCH]?ipconfig:?Incase?of?Manual?IP?Configuration,?saving?Gateway
>???information?during?network?switch
?
This?seems?to?be?a?repetition?of?the?emails?subject.?I?usually?send?my?
changes?out?with?'git?format-patch'?and?'git?send-email'.
?
Anyway,?try?to?trip?the?subject?a?bit.?Just?mention?what?you?change.?
Maybe?something?like?'Save?gateway?information'
?
>?[Problem]?If?user?use?manual?IP?configuration?while?connect?with?network(suppose?wired).
>?Then?during?network?switch?(suppose?from?wired?to?wireless),?gateway?will?not?be?saved?into
>?/var/lib/connman?respective?profile?settings.
>?So?when?user?come?back?to?earlier?network(suppose?wired?again),
>?then?connection?will?fail?as?connman?does?not?have?gateway(wrong?gateway?as?0.0.0.0)?to?connect.
>?
>?[Solution]?When?device?switch?from?wired?to?wireless?network,?gateway?information?was?missed
>?to?be?saved?into?/var/lib/connman?respective?profile.?So?during?Network?switch
>?service_save()->__connman_ipconfig_save()?will?not?remove?"IPV4.gateway"?key
>?from?respective?profile?settings?file.
?
Format?your?commit?message?so?that?you?don't?exceed?the?80?chars?per?line.
?
>?Signed-off-by:?Rahul?Jain?<[email protected]>
?
We?don't?do?Signed-off-by?at?this?project.
?
>?---
>???src/ipconfig.c?|?2?--
>???1?file?changed,?2?deletions(-)
>?
>?diff?--git?a/src/ipconfig.c?b/src/ipconfig.c
>?index?2565773..a2e398d?100644
>?---?a/src/ipconfig.c
>?+++?b/src/ipconfig.c
>?@@?-2346,8?+2346,6?@@?int?__connman_ipconfig_save(struct?connman_ipconfig?*ipconfig,
>???????????if?(ipconfig->address->gateway)
>???????????????????g_key_file_set_string(keyfile,?identifier,
>???????????????????????????key,?ipconfig->address->gateway);
>?-????????else
>?-????????????????g_key_file_remove_key(keyfile,?identifier,?key,?NULL);
>???????????g_free(key);
?
?
The?g_key_file_remove_key()?has?been?added?by?Craig:?60facabb03a9?
("ipconfig:?Remove?IPv4.gateway?key?in?settings?if?gateway?is?not?
configured").
?
I?am?not?sure?if?I?am?really?understand?the?problem?you?want?to?fix.?The?
code?you?are?deleting?seems?quite?reasonable.?If?gateway?is?valid?
(!NULL)?save?it,?otherwise?remove?it.?(The?code?above?these?lines?should?
probably?do?the?same?but?that's?a?different?story).
?
Does?the?initial?network?have?a?proper?configuration,?that?is?it?
contains?a?valid?gateway??If?so?why?is?it?missing?when?we?reach?
__connman_ipfconfig_save()??Do?we?call?__connman_ipconfig_save()?too?late?
?
Thanks,
Daniel
?
?
------------------------------
?
Message:?3
Date:?Sat,?25?Aug?2018?17:53:54?+0200
From:?Daniel?Wagner?<[email protected]>
To:?Slava?Monich?<[email protected]>
Cc:[email protected]
Subject:?Re:?[PATCH]?[dnsproxy]?Simplified?udp_server_event()
Message-ID:?<[email protected]>
Content-Type:?text/plain;?charset=utf-8;?format=flowed
?
Hi?Slava,
?
Patch?applied.
?
Thanks,
Daniel
?
?
------------------------------
?
Subject:?Digest?Footer
?
_______________________________________________
connman?mailing?list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
?
?
------------------------------
?
End?of?connman?Digest,?Vol?34,?Issue?14
***************************************
?
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 12:51:20 +0200
From: Julien Massot <[email protected]>
To: M?ns Zigher <[email protected]>
Cc: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Question]: Scan schedule
Message-ID:
<CADGp=qcjtmdeoaxsxyp1qeorg6m9gr3yfsedhr36acchb+u...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi M?ns,
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:23 AM, M?ns Zigher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thanks for your time I appreciate it. On our target what I can see is that
> if I let connman/wpa_supplicant manage the scanning I end up with an empty
> list frequently which then causes my application to fail since it cannot
> find the service to connect to. Is this is a bug or is this a situation that
> my application need to take into consideration and if so the action to take
> is to trigger a scan?
wpa_s remove bss from the list after a delay of 180s
(DEFAULT_BSS_EXPIRATION_AGE), defined here:
https://w1.fi/cgit/hostap/tree/wpa_supplicant/config.h
ConnMan have a delay of 300 seconds maximum between two scan, so the
list maybe empty.
Increasing the delay between two scan may reduce the bandwidth or can
cause beacon miss.
Up to your choice for your application, reducing the maximum scan time
of the autoscan
(used when not connected to any WiFi network) may be a good idea.
If you want to scan more often when connected change
the BGSCAN_DEFAULT macro to something lower than 180.
(look at plugins/wifi.c)
You can also change wpa_supplicant configuration to increase expiration age.
If your list should be complete at some moment, like configuration purpose.
Launch manually a scan using ConnMan dbus interface net.connman.Technology.
And yeah I agree with Daniel this WiFi plugin code is terrible,
especially about scanning.
Can't wait to give a try to iwd, and hope this scan mess is better handled.
Best Regards,
Julien
--
*This email and any attachment thereto are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that disclosing,
copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of
this email is strictly prohibited. In such case, please immediately advise
the sender, and delete all copies and attachment from your system.
This
email shall not be construed and is not tantamount to an offer, an
acceptance of offer, or an agreement by SoftBank Robotics Europe on any
discussion or contractual document whatsoever. No employee or agent is
authorized to represent or bind SoftBank Robotics Europe to third parties
by email, or act on behalf of SoftBank Robotics Europe by email, without
express written confirmation by SoftBank Robotics Europe? duly authorized
representatives.
*
*Ce message ?lectronique et ?ventuelles pi?ces
jointes sont confidentiels, et exclusivement destin?s ? la personne ou
l'entit? ? qui ils sont adress?s.
Si vous n'?tes pas le destinataire vis?,
vous ?tes pri? de ne pas divulguer, copier, distribuer ou prendre toute
d?cision sur la foi de ce message ?lectronique. Merci d'en aviser
imm?diatement l'exp?diteur et de supprimer toutes les copies et ?ventuelles
pi?ces jointes de votre syst?me.
Ce message ?lectronique n'?quivaut pas ?
une offre, ? une acceptation d?offre, ou ? un accord de SoftBank Robotics
Europe sur toute discussion ou document contractuel quel qu?il soit, et ne
peut ?tre interpr?t? comme tel. Aucun employ? ou agent de SoftBank Robotics
Europe n'est autoris? ? repr?senter ou ? engager la soci?t? par email, ou ?
agir au nom et pour le compte de la soci?t? par email, sans qu?une
confirmation ?crite soit donn?e par le repr?sentant l?gal de SoftBank
Robotics Europe ou par toute autre personne ayant re?u d?l?gation de
pouvoir appropri?e.
*
**
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/connman
------------------------------
End of connman Digest, Vol 34, Issue 16
***************************************
