Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:04 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: But unfortunately we do have some regressions right now, and we've got to look at how to fix those. If we do go driver-specific in NetworkManager, then there really will be a Flag Day where we turn off that support and force drivers to be WEXT compliant. If distros don't like that, they can either fix the drivers or patch NM (Fedora included). I'd like that day to be as soon as realistically possible. I am for considering driver-specific support, but I agree 100% we want to move toward a pure WEXT-based solution, sooner rather than later. I guess we should see what we fix by going driver-specific with wpa_supplicant. How easy is the changeover? Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 11:52 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 20:04 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: But unfortunately we do have some regressions right now, and we've got to look at how to fix those. If we do go driver-specific in NetworkManager, then there really will be a Flag Day where we turn off that support and force drivers to be WEXT compliant. If distros don't like that, they can either fix the drivers or patch NM (Fedora included). I'd like that day to be as soon as realistically possible. I am for considering driver-specific support, but I agree 100% we want to move toward a pure WEXT-based solution, sooner rather than later. I guess we should see what we fix by going driver-specific with wpa_supplicant. How easy is the changeover? We find drivers that need special-casing, and change the arguments to wpa_supplicant. Essentially, we should default to wext, grab nm_device_get_driver(), and if it needs special-casing, convert that to the wpa_supplicant driver name. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
Hi, On Sunday 08 January 2006 22:48, Dan Williams wrote: *) Your driver probably doesn't support WPA quite enough; you'll need a driver that does WEXT-18 or higher. This means that it needs to set the enc_capa bits on return from the SIOCGIWRANGE call, which only hostap seems to do right now. The attached patch works for ipw2100, but only because it can already do WPA. It was simply not telling NM that it could. Other drivers may need substantial changes to work with WEXT-18's enhanced encryption API. Drivers that _may_ work with few changes: ipw2100, ipw2200, atmel, prism54. Drivers that need lots of fixup: orinoco, airo, bcm43xx. as a ipw2200 user may I forward this to ipw-devel list, or are you working somehow together with intel (or other) driver guys?! Thanks for your excellent work. Nikolaus -- out of signatures ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 10:58 +0100, Nikolaus Filus wrote: Hi, On Sunday 08 January 2006 22:48, Dan Williams wrote: *) Your driver probably doesn't support WPA quite enough; you'll need a driver that does WEXT-18 or higher. This means that it needs to set the enc_capa bits on return from the SIOCGIWRANGE call, which only hostap seems to do right now. The attached patch works for ipw2100, but only because it can already do WPA. It was simply not telling NM that it could. Other drivers may need substantial changes to work with WEXT-18's enhanced encryption API. Drivers that _may_ work with few changes: ipw2100, ipw2200, atmel, prism54. Drivers that need lots of fixup: orinoco, airo, bcm43xx. as a ipw2200 user may I forward this to ipw-devel list, or are you working somehow together with intel (or other) driver guys?! I'll forward the patch to both ipw and kernel (netdev) devel lists. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 10:55 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 16:48 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: *) Your driver probably doesn't support WPA quite enough; you'll need a driver that does WEXT-18 or higher. This means that it needs to set the enc_capa bits on return from the SIOCGIWRANGE call, which only hostap seems to do right now. So ... should we need these updates to use WPA, or for the driver to work at all? Just to use WPA. All cards should support WEP already since you don't need fancy calls to do that... Unless wpa_supplicant is trying to be clever. In the case of ipw2100, NM checks the range-enc_capa field for WPA support bits, but WEP isn't determined from there. If there are problems with wpa_supplicant and WEP, then we definitely need to chase those down. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:11 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: Just to use WPA. All cards should support WEP already since you don't need fancy calls to do that... Unless wpa_supplicant is trying to be clever. Seems to be. SIOCSIWAUTH not being supported shuts the whole process down. This is an Atheros. Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:16 -0500, Robert Love wrote: Seems to be. SIOCSIWAUTH not being supported shuts the whole process down. This is an Atheros. Alright, got it working. Nice! I still see a boatload of SIOCSIWAUTH Operation not supported errors. But, whatever. Is 0.4.7 + your patch sufficient for WPA? Or do we need something even newer? Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:31 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:16 -0500, Robert Love wrote: Seems to be. SIOCSIWAUTH not being supported shuts the whole process down. This is an Atheros. Alright, got it working. Nice! I still see a boatload of SIOCSIWAUTH Operation not supported errors. But, whatever. Is 0.4.7 + your patch sufficient for WPA? Or do we need something even newer? I think 0.4.7 is OK, I'm using HEAD but looking at the changelog there's not much that should affect functionality since before Christmas at least. I think at the very least we should make sure 0.4.7 works correctly for us, and patch it if we need to. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:46 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: I think 0.4.7 is OK, I'm using HEAD but looking at the changelog there's not much that should affect functionality since before Christmas at least. I think at the very least we should make sure 0.4.7 works correctly for us, and patch it if we need to. wpa_supplicant 0.4.7 + your patch works fine for non-WPA. I'll try WPA in a bit -- not sure if it will work out-of-the-box with madwifi-ng. Have you / will you submit your patch upstream to wpa_supplicant? Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:02 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:46 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: I think 0.4.7 is OK, I'm using HEAD but looking at the changelog there's not much that should affect functionality since before Christmas at least. I think at the very least we should make sure 0.4.7 works correctly for us, and patch it if we need to. wpa_supplicant 0.4.7 + your patch works fine for non-WPA. I'll try WPA in a bit -- not sure if it will work out-of-the-box with madwifi-ng. Have you / will you submit your patch upstream to wpa_supplicant? Sent the patch to Jouni and [EMAIL PROTECTED] last night. dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 10:55 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 16:48 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: *) Your driver probably doesn't support WPA quite enough; you'll need a driver that does WEXT-18 or higher. This means that it needs to set the enc_capa bits on return from the SIOCGIWRANGE call, which only hostap seems to do right now. So ... should we need these updates to use WPA, or for the driver to work at all? I get errors about SIOCSIWAUTH not supported. Note that while wpa_supplicant supports using driver-specific methods for WPA and other settings, we want to push all drivers towards conforming to the WEXT spec on this one. That means support for SIOCSIWAUTH and SIOCSIWENCODEEXT. We _may_ have to allow driver-specific support in the mean time, but I'd rather not do that if at all possible. (for instance, atmel doesn't seem to work right now for normal WEP) Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:18 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: Note that while wpa_supplicant supports using driver-specific methods for WPA and other settings, we want to push all drivers towards conforming to the WEXT spec on this one. That means support for SIOCSIWAUTH and SIOCSIWENCODEEXT. We _may_ have to allow driver-specific support in the mean time, but I'd rather not do that if at all possible. (for instance, atmel doesn't seem to work right now for normal WEP) We are going to need to go through the various drivers and see how they fair. We are probably going to neeed driver-specific support. Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:27 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:18 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: Note that while wpa_supplicant supports using driver-specific methods for WPA and other settings, we want to push all drivers towards conforming to the WEXT spec on this one. That means support for SIOCSIWAUTH and SIOCSIWENCODEEXT. We _may_ have to allow driver-specific support in the mean time, but I'd rather not do that if at all possible. (for instance, atmel doesn't seem to work right now for normal WEP) We are going to need to go through the various drivers and see how they fair. We are probably going to neeed driver-specific support. Even if that's the case, we're going to need to push those drivers towards WEXT compliance, such that they do what they need to do with the wpa_supplicant wext driver. I'm much more amenable to making sure they all work with WEP wpa_supplicant first, and taking more time with WPA. For example, the atmel driver for wpa_supplicant doesn't work on the in-kernel atmel driver _at__all_, probably because it expects atmelwlandriver.sf.net rather than the in-kernel one. I'm looking at fixing that up for WEP-only at the moment. But unfortunately we do have some regressions right now, and we've got to look at how to fix those. If we do go driver-specific in NetworkManager, then there really will be a Flag Day where we turn off that support and force drivers to be WEXT compliant. If distros don't like that, they can either fix the drivers or patch NM (Fedora included). I'd like that day to be as soon as realistically possible. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
WPA status 2006-01-08
This will be likely be the last WPA-related status update email, which means that the job is mostly done :) Major Changes since Jan 3rd --- 1) Starting from example code from Kay Sievers (thanks!), I've written the supplicant manager code. Instead of writing a config file, we connect to the supplicant's control sockets. It's cleaner this way. 2) WPA-related options have been enabled in the Gnome applet 3) Minor WPA-related bugs have been fixed in both the Gnome applet and NetworkManager itself What's left to be done? --- 1) Bug fixes 2) Whack drivers into shape That's about it. If you've got a relatively recent wpa_supplicant (say, from the last couple weeks or so), and you've got a WPA-capable card driver (see below *), you should be set for WPA Personal (WPA1) Preshared-Key connections. I've tested them, and it works. I'd like to clean things up, get stuff working reliably, then move on to adding WPA2-PSK/CCMP connections (ie, using AES). After than, we start doing 802.1x authentication, RADIUS, and possibly LEAP. Oh, and Bluetooth DUN, now that I have a Bluetooth phone. Cheers, Dan *) Your driver probably doesn't support WPA quite enough; you'll need a driver that does WEXT-18 or higher. This means that it needs to set the enc_capa bits on return from the SIOCGIWRANGE call, which only hostap seems to do right now. The attached patch works for ipw2100, but only because it can already do WPA. It was simply not telling NM that it could. Other drivers may need substantial changes to work with WEXT-18's enhanced encryption API. Drivers that _may_ work with few changes: ipw2100, ipw2200, atmel, prism54. Drivers that need lots of fixup: orinoco, airo, bcm43xx. --- ipw2100.c.nowpa 2006-01-08 14:04:00.0 -0500 +++ ipw2100.c 2006-01-08 15:47:37.0 -0500 @@ -7236,7 +7236,7 @@ /* Set the Wireless Extension versions */ range-we_version_compiled = WIRELESS_EXT; - range-we_version_source = 16; + range-we_version_source = 18; // range-retry_capa; /* What retry options are supported */ // range-retry_flags; /* How to decode max/min retry limit */ @@ -7262,6 +7262,11 @@ } range-num_frequency = val; +#if WIRELESS_EXT 17 + range-enc_capa = IW_ENC_CAPA_WPA | IW_ENC_CAPA_WPA2 | + IW_ENC_CAPA_CIPHER_TKIP | IW_ENC_CAPA_CIPHER_CCMP; +#endif /* WIRELESS_EXT 17 */ + IPW_DEBUG_WX(GET Range\n); return 0; ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 16:48 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: That's about it. If you've got a relatively recent wpa_supplicant (say, from the last couple weeks or so), and you've got a WPA-capable card driver (see below *), you should be set for WPA Personal (WPA1) Preshared-Key connections. I've tested them, and it works. I'd like to clean things up, get stuff working reliably, then move on to adding WPA2-PSK/CCMP connections (ie, using AES). After than, we start doing 802.1x authentication, RADIUS, and possibly LEAP. Oh, and Bluetooth DUN, now that I have a Bluetooth phone. We should all tip our hat to Dan. Excellent work! Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-08
Congratulations, this is what many people are waiting for! I'd test, but haven't a wpa-ready driver (bcm43xx). Thanks! --Derek ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-03
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 10:24 -0500, Robert Love wrote: On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 17:19 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: What's left to be done? --- 'Connect to Other Network' and 'Create New Network' do not work. Is this known or ... ? The latter prints a warning: tried to manually connect to network 'foo' without providing security information!' And then, in both cases, basically nothing happens. Hmm, bug :) Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-03
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 12:21 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: They should be hooked up, I got it all working before Christmas and before I started the NMDevice refactor. Hrm. Also - are we converting old-style gconf/keyring data? Yes, since around the 23 Dec 2005 or so. Can you try running the applet with --sm-disable and see if it prints anything out when you try Other wireless network ? Sure thing. It does not print anything. The daemon prints: NetworkManager: debug info[1136482380.660630] (): Forcing AP 'wolf' NetworkManager: WARNING (): nm_device_802_11_wireless_get_activation_ap: tried to manually connect to network 'wolf' without providing security information! NetworkManager: information User Switch: /org/freedesktop/NetworkManager/Devices/ath0 / wolf NetworkManager: information Deactivating device ath0. NetworkManager: nm_act_request_new: assertion `ap != NULL' failed NetworkManager: nm_policy_schedule_device_activation: assertion `req != NULL' failed Meanwhile, doing Create New Network, shows no response in the daemon, but the applet prints: ** Message: information Creating network 'molly' on device '/org/freedesktop/NetworkManager/Devices/ath0'. In either case, nothing actually happens. The applet looks the same and the daemon initiates no change. Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-03
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 12:32 -0500, Robert Love wrote: In either case, nothing actually happens. The applet looks the same and the daemon initiates no change. The problem is nm-dbus-nm.c :: line 260, where we call nm_device_802_11_wireless_get_activation_ap(). security is NULL, but the function wants a non-NULL security in the case of a non-scanned network. It looks like nm_dbus_nm_set_active_device() should be creating a security context? But ... if I try to connect to an AP with encryption via Connect to Other, I get: NetworkManager: nm_ap_security_new_deserialize: assertion `dbus_message_iter_get_arg_type (iter) == DBUS_TYPE_INT32' failed NetworkManager: WARNING (): nm-dbus-nm.c:254 (nm_dbus_nm_set_active_device): Invalid argument (wireless security info). Does that point to something obvious? You aren't seeing the same behavior? Robert Love ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
WPA status 2006-01-03
Another WPA-related update. Major Changes since Dec 22 -- 1) NMDevice has been refactored and GObject-ified. Wired and wireless are now subclasses. This should make a Bluetooth DUN device quite a bit easier to write, for example. Anyone? 2) The applet respects capabilities for both access points and devices 3) Normalization of how generic wireless ciphers in libnm-util return hashed key information What's left to be done? --- o Hook up WPA options in the applet o Create a supplicant_manager object that controls invocations of wpa_supplicant o Write out correct wpa_supplicant config file and ask the NMAPSecurity objects to write out their security information o Connect to wpa_supplicant's control socket to monitor association status Again, we don't actually do WPA yet. The NMDevice refactor was necessary to constrain the parts of the code that utilize wpa_supplicant. These changes should now be localized in the 802.11 wireless device subclass, nm-device-802-11-wireless.c. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status 2006-01-03
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 05:19:29PM -0500, Dan Williams wrote: Another WPA-related update. Major Changes since Dec 22 -- 1) NMDevice has been refactored and GObject-ified. Wired and wireless are now subclasses. This should make a Bluetooth DUN device quite a bit easier to write, for example. Anyone? 2) The applet respects capabilities for both access points and devices 3) Normalization of how generic wireless ciphers in libnm-util return hashed key information What's left to be done? --- o Hook up WPA options in the applet o Create a supplicant_manager object that controls invocations of wpa_supplicant o Write out correct wpa_supplicant config file and ask the NMAPSecurity objects to write out their security information o Connect to wpa_supplicant's control socket to monitor association status Dan, can you comment on: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/networkmanager-list/2005-December/msg00193.html and let me know, what you think we need more than this. The code should work for setting up WPA PSK from NM and listen to wpa_supplicant events from NM. Thanks, Kay ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
WPA status
Any ETA on when builds will be available for this to try that won't crash my machine? Regards, Wendell ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: WPA status
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 16:32 -0500, Wendell MacKenzie wrote: Any ETA on when builds will be available for this to try that won't crash my machine? Realistically, after Christmas. Dan ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: networkmanager wpa status?
Work is proceeding slowly, but should be ramping up soon in the next couple of weeks. Its something we need to have. That said, having looked a bunch at wpa_supplicant again, I'm no longer convinced that it should be standalone. I'm just not sure, but it depends on how much the upstream maintainer _dis_likes patches that would give the ability to turn wpa_supplicant into a library. He's stated that he doesn't see a reason to do so in the past, but perhaps we've just got more convincing to do. Can certainly see your point of view as it would make it much easier to use wpa_supplicant including status tracking. But if were going to begin from scratch perhaps Open1x (http://www.open1x.org) should have a chance. Maybe they're more into the library idea. One big downside to Open1x is configuration. Last time i looked the configuration needed for WPA seemed allot more difficult than wpa_supplicant. Also I think it will take more development hours to do than wpa_supplicant. Only guessing thou. The extra work might be worth it because then NM would be able to do 802.1x wired as well as wireless. Lastly if quick development is of great importance I'm probably not the one for the job. I have zero library development experience. Thou I will gladly help as much as i can and as fast as I can ;). -- Tim Warberg Email: twarberg at gmail.com ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
Re: networkmanager wpa status?
Forget what i wrote about Open1x. Just had another look, wish i did this before i wrote the mail, it seems that Open1x only does WPA with Radius. Guess were sticking with wpa_supplicant. -- Tim Warberg Email: twarberg at gmail.com ___ NetworkManager-list mailing list NetworkManager-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/networkmanager-list
