Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-10 Thread Robert Love
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-10 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Nikolaus Filus
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Robert Love
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Robert Love
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Robert Love
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Robert Love
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-09 Thread Dan Williams
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

WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-08 Thread Dan Williams
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

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-08 Thread Robert Love
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.

Re: WPA status 2006-01-08

2006-01-08 Thread Derek Frye
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