Hi, Fred Using the latest compat-wireless, you can ignore the nohwcrypt=1 while loading ath5k.
--- Chun-Yeow On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 8:42 AM, fred veldini <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok I recompiled without the older patch and still have the same issues. > > I did try to create the mesh without authsae and everything works fine. > > Is there anything I can do to help identify the issue? > > Thanks > > Fred > > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:33 PM, fred veldini <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I will try it and let you know, thanks for the quick reply. >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Thomas Pedersen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:49 PM, fred veldini <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > Hello Group, >>> > >>> > I have been testing a multiple node mesh with ath5k and Authsae, >>> > >>> > We are working our way up to 15 units in a mesh to do some stress >>> > testing. >>> > >>> > We have run into a snag and not sure what to look at from here. >>> > >>> > We have latest Kernel 3.6 with latest Compat-wireless build >>> > We have the latest iw and authsae from GIT >>> > >>> > Everything comes up and on-line with out any problem initially. >>> > >>> > The issue we see is that some units, (Not all of them and not all the >>> > same >>> > units) will show >>> > >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901686.331237) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901526) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901686.331237) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901701.695901) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901527) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901701.696901) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901717.61565) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901528) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901717.61565) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901732.426229) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901529) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901732.426229) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901747.790893) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901530) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901747.791893) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_PEER_CANDIDATE(1349901762.131713) >>> > new unauthed sta (seq num=1349901531) >>> > NL80211_CMD_NEW_STATION (1349901762.131713) >>> > >>> > If I do a iw dev mesh2 station dump I see >>> > iw dev mesh2 station dump >>> > Station 00:15:6d:94:4f:76 (on mesh2) >>> > inactive time: 545 ms >>> > rx bytes: 800 >>> > rx packets: 16 >>> > tx bytes: 0 >>> > tx packets: 0 >>> > tx retries: 0 >>> > tx failed: 0 >>> > signal: -30 dBm >>> > signal avg: -30 dBm >>> > Toffset: 10133145424 us >>> > tx bitrate: 1.0 MBit/s >>> > mesh llid: 0 >>> > mesh plid: 0 >>> > mesh plink: LISTEN ------ LISTEN STATE COULD BE ATTRIBUTED BY >>> > NO >>> > MFP? >>> > authorized: no >>> > authenticated: no >>> > preamble: long >>> > WMM/WME: yes >>> > MFP: no ------- NOTICE NO MFP >>> > TDLS peer: no >>> > Station 00:15:6d:94:5a:39 (on mesh2) >>> > inactive time: 17702 ms >>> > rx bytes: 1539 >>> > rx packets: 23 >>> > tx bytes: 1090 >>> > tx packets: 7 >>> > tx retries: 6 >>> > tx failed: 1 >>> > signal: -62 dBm >>> > signal avg: -61 dBm >>> > tx bitrate: 1.0 MBit/s >>> > mesh llid: 0 >>> > mesh plid: 0 >>> > mesh plink: ESTAB >>> > authorized: yes >>> > authenticated: yes >>> > preamble: long >>> > WMM/WME: yes >>> > MFP: yes >>> > TDLS peer: no >>> > Station 00:15:6d:94:6e:6b (on mesh2) >>> > inactive time: 721 ms >>> > rx bytes: 544314 >>> > rx packets: 6054 >>> > tx bytes: 254624 >>> > tx packets: 883 >>> > tx retries: 58 >>> > tx failed: 0 >>> > signal: -46 dBm >>> > signal avg: -46 dBm >>> > Toffset: 490313930 us >>> > tx bitrate: 54.0 MBit/s >>> > mesh llid: 0 >>> > mesh plid: 0 >>> > mesh plink: ESTAB >>> > authorized: yes >>> > authenticated: yes >>> > preamble: long >>> > WMM/WME: yes >>> > MFP: yes >>> > TDLS peer: no >>> > >>> > If I reboot the routers the same thing happens. >>> > I have tried with and without nohwencrypt=1 >>> > I have also applied the patch >>> > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg95993.html which was >>> > missing >>> > for the latest build >>> > any help on what to look for would be appreciated. >>> > >>> >>> I think this patch: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1429831/ was >>> meant to replace the one you applied. Can you try without Chun-Yeow's >>> original mgmt frame encryption patch for ath5k? >>> >>> Thomas >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Devel mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.open80211s.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
