On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:12 AM Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:55:10AM +0200, Mathy Vanhoef wrote:
> > That figure only appears to be an example. It doesn't say an exchange
> > must ("shall") follow that order. So I don't see where the standard
> > puts a constraint on how the
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:55:10AM +0200, Mathy Vanhoef wrote:
> That figure only appears to be an example. It doesn't say an exchange
> must ("shall") follow that order. So I don't see where the standard
> puts a constraint on how the authentication frames are exchanged.
I know this figure is
> > If that is the case, this would conflict with the SAE handshake as
> > defined in the 802.11-2016 standard. That's because when the AP
> > receives a Commit frame, the AP is allowed to send both a Commit and
> > Confirm frame (see 12.4.8.6.3). So according to the standard, the
> > client must
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 02:36:20PM +0200, Mathy Vanhoef wrote:
> It seems that in client mode, the Linux kernel only accepts an
> authentication frame after sending one itself. Is this interpretation
> correct?
For infrastructure station case, yes.
> If that is the case, this would conflict with
Hello,
It seems that in client mode, the Linux kernel only accepts an
authentication frame after sending one itself. Is this interpretation
correct?
If that is the case, this would conflict with the SAE handshake as
defined in the 802.11-2016 standard. That's because when the AP
receives a
