On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 09:47:14AM +0000, Alan Maguire wrote: > On 05/02/2010 07:14, Michael Hunter wrote: > >On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:02:35 -0800 > >Renee Danson Sommerfeld<renee.sommerfeld at sun.com> wrote: > > > >>I found this small bug while doing manual test 3, AP selection. I've > >>tested this fix and verified that this test now passes. Please let me > >>know what you think! > >> > >>http://jurassic.sfbay/~okie/webrev.14377/ > >ncu_phys.c:908 I'm not sure I follow this. In this past the code was > >such that if the essid didn't match we continued. Now the essid might > >not match but the bssid could and we would get through.
This was the intent; I wanted cases where the scan result did not include an ESSID (and thus the ESSID match was guaranteed to fail) but we had a matching BSSID in the known wlan's list to go through. > Good point - I'm not sure if BSSIDs are guaranteed to be unique > between different WLANs (they are mostly the AP's MAC addresses > in practice, but there are exceptions). Checking if > cur_wlan->nww_essid is blank (indicating a non-ESSID-broadcasting > WLAN) as well might be worthwhile to be on the safe side, i.e. This is a good suggestion. I've updated the webrev (with this change and also a comment to help explain this check); still needs testing, but feel free to take a look. -renee
