On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 08:09:39PM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 07:33:21 -0700, David Kimdon wrote: > > Wireless vlan interfaces need to have the same mac address as > > other sub interfaces. Rather than complicate the kernel here by > > adding yet another case where uniqueness is not required, remove > > the check on mac address uniqueness altogether. > > > > We should not implement a mac address allocation policy here. It > > is difficult to get it right in all cases and does not belong in > > the kernel. It is better to leave this to be implemented as a > > userspace policy. > > I disagree. This is not about policy, this is about prevention of > accidental violation of IEEE 802.11. The only effect of this patch would > be forcing drivers to do that check themselves thus duplicating code.
That is fine, I don't feel strongly, I will cook up a patch that fixes the check for vlan interfaces. > What is the purpose of "wireless vlans"? We use wireless vlans to isolate stations to separate multicast domains within the same bss based on the input of a radius server. A stations is bound to a particular wireless vlan interface, all stations on that wireless vlan share broadcast keys, and the wireless vlan interface can be bridged to a particular wired vlan. > Is it something Atheros-specific? no, it is chip driver agnostic. > Is it documented somewhere? Or is it in some of IEEE 802.11 > standards and I just overlooked it? (In that case I would be more > than happy to review the whole stack and fix it.) Could you send us > some pointers? Take a look at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3580.txt section 3.31. Tunnel Attributes. That is what we are processing at a high level to get vlan assignment. FWIW, we have code on its way to hostapd cvs that uses wireless vlans which will show more details of this particular implementation. David - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
