On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 03:58 -0800, Darren Reed wrote:
> James Carlson wrote:
> > We'd probably be better off just to hash ESSID and BSSID together and
> > use some printable form of the hash as the secobj name.
> >   
> 
> I like that last idea better than any of the above as it reduces
> the chance of a natural collision.

That would only make sense to me if there was a documented way of
knowing what secobj name was being used by NWAM for any given WiFi link.
Otherwise, it makes it difficult to diagnose problems through the CLI by
doing:

dladm connect-wifi -e <essid> -k <secobj-name> <link>

... after NWAM has automatically created <secobj-name> through the GUI.

-Seb


_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to