Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-06 Thread Johannes Berg
Let me try to summarise this... probably wrong :) > 1.5 KB sounds like a small scan result set to me.. I'm hitting 100+ > BSSes at work (well, not really your normal environment ;-), and 50 at > home.. These go way beyond 1.5 KB; closer to 32 KB at times, I'd guess. Ok this is easy, we need huge

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-05 Thread Jouni Malinen
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 09:13:53AM -0400, Stuffed Crust wrote: > (Leave out the RSNIE, AuthType and KeyMgmt stuff; while they're > used in the actual key negotiation/derivation, they're separate > problems and have no bearing on the crypto layer. From the driver's > perspective the RSNIE is

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-05 Thread Jouni Malinen
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 01:57:38PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 16:19 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 09:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > Should cfg80211 do the chore of keeping track of the whole scan results? > > On the other hand, that doesn't seem

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-05 Thread Stuffed Crust
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 01:57:38PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > * None > - Crypto: None > - 802.11 Auth: Open System > > * Static WEP > - Keys: up to 4 group keys > - Crypto: WEP-40, WEP-104, WEP-152, WEP-256 > - 802.11 Auth: Open System or Shared Key > - Key Mgmt/Auth: non

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-05 Thread Johannes Berg
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 13:57 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > Are we talking about config changes when some other process pushes a new > config to the card, or when something happens over the air, like new > association or deauth? Well, both actually :) Yeah, we should have different groups for that.

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-05 Thread Johannes Berg
Umm, looks like I skipped this paragraph in my earlier reply to you. Sorry about that. > I'd also argue that one specific BSSID is part of an initial > configuration. We should support that in config command. It's an > implicit SET_FIXED_BSSID, yes. But one of the major points of > nl80211/cfg8

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-04 Thread Dan Williams
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 16:19 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 09:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > I don't really have an explicit ToDo list, but here are a few points > > that come to mind > > * notification support when parameters change multicast a netlink > >message t

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-04 Thread Johannes Berg
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 09:41 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > I don't really have an explicit ToDo list, but here are a few points > that come to mind > * notification support when parameters change multicast a netlink >message to all subscribers of that group I think we'll want at least two gro

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-04 Thread Johannes Berg
On Mon, 2006-10-02 at 12:15 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you really mean "grab the current > _cmdlist_"? Because I'm not sure how grabbing the current configuration > (using GET_CONFIG) would necessarily return the right set of options for > the device. Also,

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-10-02 Thread Johannes Berg
James, Good points. Just a few comments. > The EEPROM contents typically represent the configuration and operating > parameters which have been tested and certified to be operational. > > These would represent the only settings which a user can operate with > and still be covered by existing cer

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-09-29 Thread Michael Wu
On Thursday 28 September 2006 05:23, Johannes Berg wrote: > * why should there be configuration per device? The user can only >be operating in one country at a time... I think that information >should just be available inside cfg80211 in a global structure >for use by drivers whenever

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-09-29 Thread Michael Wu
On Friday 29 September 2006 17:10, James Ketrenos wrote: > Johannes Berg wrote: > > * Should the userspace daemon be allowed to unilaterally update the > >regulatory information if it learns something new (via the user)? > > Many countries forbid users (root is still a user) being enabled to >

Re: [RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-09-29 Thread James Ketrenos
Johannes Berg wrote: > * Should the userspace daemon be allowed to unilaterally update the >regulatory information if it learns something new (via the user)? Many countries forbid users (root is still a user) being enabled to override the parameters set up by the hardware vendor as tested fo

[RFC] cfg80211 and nl80211

2006-09-28 Thread Johannes Berg
This patch adds cfg80211, a new configuration system for wireless hardware as well as nl80211, the netlink-based userspace interface for it. It currently features a bunch of configuration requests, support for adding and removing virtual interfaces, the ability to inject packets and more. Signed-