> Going back to what this thread was about: what characters to allow in > secobj names? > > 1. Are we allowing just alphanumeric and '_' for the secure object > names? What about '-' and '.' which are already used explicitly by NWAM?
I think it's OK to allow those if it'd be useful to NWAM. > 2. What's the plan of action for secobj names that will be invalidated > by the implementation of (1)? It's only really an issue for upgrade, right? If the user has to re-input their key in the case where their ESSID used characters that are invalid for a secobj, that doesn't seem so bad, at least based on where we are with Indiana these days. -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
