Hi Andrzej, Thank you for your reply. I was thinking of adding "Host based privacy" as an additional feature, by default "Controller based privacy" will be used. I thought this feature will be useful for NimBLE Host only implementation where vendor's controller does not support privacy feature. Please let me know your take on this.
Regards, Prasad ________________________________ From: Andrzej Kaczmarek <andrzej.kaczma...@codecoup.pl> Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 6:09 PM To: dev@mynewt.apache.org <dev@mynewt.apache.org> Cc: Hrishikesh Dhayagude <hrishikesh.dhayag...@espressif.com> Subject: Re: NimBLE: Host based privacy support Hi Prasad, On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 1:13 PM Prasad Alatkar <prasad.alat...@espressif.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have been working on "NimBLE host based privacy (RPA)" with no > involvement of controller for past few days, spec ref: Vol 3, part C, > section 10.7.1.2 / 10.7.2.2 (Privacy Feature in a Peripheral/central with > Host-based privacy). Before I come up with pull request, here are few key > points: > > 1. Similar to `BLE_LL_CFG_FEAT_LL_PRIVACY`, add > `BLE_HOST_BASED_PRIVACY`. > 2. As controller is not aware of host based privacy, we can not > directly use "own address type = BLE_OWN_ADDR_RPA_PUBLIC_DEFAULT". I have > tried to use "own address type = BLE_OWN_ADDR_RANDOM" for this feature. > 3. Provide API to enable/disable Host based privacy, wherein the RPA > will be generated and address will be set in controller as BLE_ADDR_RANDOM, > provide API similar to `ble_hs_id_set_rnd` which sets RPA address. > 4. Handle the peer side privacy in `LE enhanced connection` & > `advertisement reports`, save the peer RPA in "Peer Records" (similar to > Resolving list ). > 5. Once the pairing is done and bond is established, add device to > resolved list (maintained in host) and update corresponding "Peer record". > 6. While reconnecting, check if the peer is RPA, check if it is > resolvable by any entry from "peer records", get entry from "resolving > list" corresponding to it and we are done with the reconnection. > > > Please let me know if this is an acceptable approach for mynewt nimble. > NimBLE does not support host based privacy by design - it works primarily with NimBLE controller (i.e. 4.2+) which does support LL Privacy and thus simply assumes such support. I think this is just fine and unless you have a very good reason why host based privacy support is required, we should keep it as it is now. > > Regards, > Prasad > Best, Andrzej
