Re: a few patches...

From: Gerald Britton (
Date: 2002-09-10 15:57:23 UTC

On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 06:36:28PM +0300, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > The second patch (02-promisc)
> I would like to do some testing with this before applying it and return
> to this after getting the next release of the driver out.

I agree, it ought to be tested (which was why i posted it :). I wish there was a better understanding of the increase in errors floated up by this. I was initially confused until I noticed that linux-wlan-ng silences errors there too. I'm thinking this may be nice to do in monitor mode also.

> I really do hate the format of IEEE80211_PRISM, so using it in more
> places is not exactly what I would like to see. Unfortunately, it has
> been included in libpcap and Ethereal so it might be a bit difficult to
> change this. I would prefer to keep the header stuff simple and remove
> all the reduntant info.

I'd much prefer to just have the raw RX/TX headers rather than the blown up version. Perhaps having a tristate "arphrd" parameter which would do 802.11, 802.11 w/wlan-ng headers, 802.11 w/raw prism rx/tx headers.

It would be nice to have the tx headers available from userspace to have better control over packets injected as well.

> iwpriv monitor could be used to provide a backward compatible way of
> changing mode, but it might be OK to remove it (and keep the driver
> cleaner). I haven't tested IW_MODE_MONITOR, but hopefully it can be used
> also with older kernels and wireless tools.

I looked into keeping it and determined it would require a bit more state be kept by the driver since we're now checking if we're in monitor mode with iw_mode (and if monitor is disabled by iwpriv, where do we go back to). But it shouldn't be hard to keep it for compatibility.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4.