From: Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v5 0/9] EAPoL over NL80211
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 08:54:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0603f0fc-8a89-6ef4-5e9a-1d59569efa44@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1521714493.19621.5.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Hi Johannes,
> However, it doesn't actually matter at all - we shouldn't get there
> with VLAN interface. EAPOL frames are always sent out to the
> corresponding AP interface, see ieee80211_rx_h_data:
>
> if (rx->sdata->vif.type == NL80211_IFTYPE_AP_VLAN &&
> unlikely(port_control) && sdata->bss) {
> sdata = container_of(sdata->bss, struct ieee80211_sub_if_data,
> u.ap);
> dev = sdata->dev;
> rx->sdata = sdata;
> }
>
Okay, that makes things easier. However, it does bring up a question.
Should we be symmetric and remove AP_VLAN as a valid target of control
port frames? E.g. drop NL80211_IFTYPE_AP_VLAN case in patch 2 of the
series. In effect we'd require all control port frame traffic to go
over the master interface.
>
>>>> - JOIN_IBSS & JOIN_MESH don't seem to support control_port_ethertype or
>>>> control_port_no_encrypt. Should struct cfg80211_crypto_settings parsed inside
>>>> nl80211_crypto_settings be added to ibss_params or mesh_config/mesh_setup?
>>>
>>> I don't think it matters - they just don't support this now and don't
>>> really need to.
>>>
>>
>> Except that the eapol over nl80211 flag is being sent in security
>> settings. This covers STA/AP/P2P_GO/P2P_CLIENT. We need some way of
>> passing this information for mesh & ibss.
>
> Not sure I understand what you're saying. Can't we just say the flag
> isn't permitted in those modes?
I'm the one confused now. You wanted me to add IFTYPE_IBSS in
nl80211_tx_control_port in your earlier feedback :)
Let me try to restate what I said earlier in a different way and see if
it makes things a bit clearer:
So in patch 9, we set sdata->control_port_over_nl80211 based on
parameters passed into start_ap or mgd_assoc. The
control_port_over_nl80211 flag is passed in cfg80211_crypto_settings
structure that is part of the relevant parameters structure. If
sdata->control_port_over_nl80211 is true, then we actually redirect the
control port frames to nl80211.
So my question is, if we want to support IBSS/MESH, should we:
1. add the whole cfg80211_crypto_settings to the IBSS/MESH parameters,
2. add the control_port_over_nl80211 flag directly to IBSS/MESH parameters
3. Pass the flag some other way?
4. Or drop IBSS/MESH from patch 2 (nl80211_tx_control_port) completely?
Regards,
-Denis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-22 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-13 21:59 [RFC v5 0/9] EAPoL over NL80211 Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 1/9] nl80211: Add CMD_CONTROL_PORT_FRAME API Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 2/9] nl80211: Implement TX of control port frames Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 3/9] nl80211: Add CONTROL_PORT_OVER_NL80211 attribute Denis Kenzior
2018-03-21 7:47 ` Johannes Berg
2018-03-21 15:01 ` Denis Kenzior
2018-03-21 15:09 ` Johannes Berg
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 4/9] cfg80211: Support all iftypes in autodisconnect_wk Denis Kenzior
2018-03-21 7:46 ` Johannes Berg
2018-03-21 15:27 ` Denis Kenzior
2018-03-21 15:40 ` Johannes Berg
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 5/9] nl80211: Add SOCKET_OWNER support to JOIN_IBSS Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 6/9] nl80211: Add SOCKET_OWNER support to JOIN_MESH Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 7/9] nl80211: Add SOCKET_OWNER support to START_AP Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 8/9] mac80211: Add support for tx_control_port Denis Kenzior
2018-03-13 21:59 ` [RFC v5 9/9] mac80211: Send control port frames over nl80211 Denis Kenzior
2018-03-21 15:13 ` [RFC v5 0/9] EAPoL over NL80211 Johannes Berg
2018-03-21 15:18 ` Denis Kenzior
2018-03-22 10:28 ` Johannes Berg
2018-03-22 13:54 ` Denis Kenzior [this message]
2018-03-23 8:04 ` Johannes Berg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0603f0fc-8a89-6ef4-5e9a-1d59569efa44@gmail.com \
--to=denkenz@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.