netdev - Re: wireless userspace MLME and generic netlink vs. multicast (was: Re: [Take 2] mac80211 IEEE802.11e/WMM code cleanup)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 18 Jun 2007 10:08:47 +0800
From:	Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...el.com>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	Michael Wu <flamingice@...rmilk.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	David Lamparter <lists@...c24.net>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: wireless userspace MLME and generic netlink vs. multicast
	(was: Re: [Take 2] mac80211 IEEE802.11e/WMM code cleanup)

On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 14:03 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> It sounds to me like you're proposing that wpa_supplicant is the only
> supported userspace MLME and that wpa_cli is the only way to configure
> it, basically. I sure hope that isn't so. 

OK. This is the key of the discussion. Do we take wpa_supplicant the
only implementation of userspace MLME or even decision making (ie. DLS
config) daemon? If so, we don't need the API. Otherwise we'd better have
the API in the kernel because we cannot expect both userspace MLME
implentation A and B support the same API (via IPC) for configuration.

Thanks,
-yi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html