On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 04:06:02PM +0530, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> On Wed January 26 2011 18:37:00 Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:38:53AM +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> > > Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
> >
> > Are you sure about that?
>
> Yes, I'
On Wed January 26 2011 18:37:00 Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:38:53AM +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> > Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
>
> Are you sure about that?
Yes, I'm sure. Please test it yourself, if you don't believe me. :)
I'm using ath5k,
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:38:53AM +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
Are you sure about that? Why would there be any issues in using software
crypto for decrypting WEP frames while everything else is done in
hardware? I'm really interested
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 18:21 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> On Wed January 26 2011 17:29:48 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 11:38 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> > > Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
> > > (As far as i understand it, with WEP the lookup is just
On Wed January 26 2011 17:29:48 Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 11:38 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> > Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
> > (As far as i understand it, with WEP the lookup is just done based on the
> > key index in the WLAN header field. mac80
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 11:38 +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote:
> Even without my patch, WEP does not work with multiple vifs.
> (As far as i understand it, with WEP the lookup is just done based on the key
> index in the WLAN header field. mac80211 (or is it hostapd?) sets up both
> keys
> for both i
