All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luis Carlos Cobo <luisca@cozybit.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: j@w1.fi, bridge@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bridge] [RFC] Do not activate promiscuous mode on wlan interfaces for	bridging.
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:19:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1213294793.6615.16.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1213255570.3871.8.camel@johannes.berg>

On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 09:26 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> All your description makes a lot of sense, but I don't see why altering
> the bridge code is necessary. In mac80211, we decided that the "promisc"
> bit only means to capture all frames in the current BSS (remember that
> in ethernet there is no way to capture frames from different LAN
> segments) and hence an AP would not behave differently in promisc mode
> at all since, by definition, it sees all BSS traffic.

You are right, within the BSS every frame is going to be addressed to
the AP anyway, so we should not receive more or less frames when
activating promiscuous mode.

When activating promiscuous mode in this device, it stops acknowledging
frames, and this impairs the association process. The other solution
would be to ignore the promiscuous mode commands (i.e. never send the
command to the device) for interfaces in AP mode. If this is the only
device showing this behavior, maybe that would be the best solution.

-- 
Luis Carlos Cobo Rus       GnuPG ID: 44019B60
cozybit Inc.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luis Carlos Cobo <luisca@cozybit.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org,
	j@w1.fi, bridge@linux-foundation.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Do not activate promiscuous mode on wlan interfaces for bridging.
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:19:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1213294793.6615.16.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1213255570.3871.8.camel@johannes.berg>

On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 09:26 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> All your description makes a lot of sense, but I don't see why altering
> the bridge code is necessary. In mac80211, we decided that the "promisc"
> bit only means to capture all frames in the current BSS (remember that
> in ethernet there is no way to capture frames from different LAN
> segments) and hence an AP would not behave differently in promisc mode
> at all since, by definition, it sees all BSS traffic.

You are right, within the BSS every frame is going to be addressed to
the AP anyway, so we should not receive more or less frames when
activating promiscuous mode.

When activating promiscuous mode in this device, it stops acknowledging
frames, and this impairs the association process. The other solution
would be to ignore the promiscuous mode commands (i.e. never send the
command to the device) for interfaces in AP mode. If this is the only
device showing this behavior, maybe that would be the best solution.

-- 
Luis Carlos Cobo Rus       GnuPG ID: 44019B60
cozybit Inc.



  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-12 18:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-12  1:06 [Bridge] [RFC] Do not activate promiscuous mode on wlan interfaces for bridging Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12  1:06 ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12  5:33 ` [Bridge] " Jouni Malinen
2008-06-12  5:33   ` Jouni Malinen
2008-06-12 18:10   ` [Bridge] " Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:10     ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:10     ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12  7:26 ` [Bridge] " Johannes Berg
2008-06-12  7:26   ` Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:19   ` Luis Carlos Cobo [this message]
2008-06-12 18:19     ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:20     ` [Bridge] " Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:20       ` Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:34       ` [Bridge] " Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:34         ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:34         ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:44         ` [Bridge] " Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:44           ` Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:44           ` Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:53           ` [Bridge] " Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:53             ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:53             ` Luis Carlos Cobo
2008-06-12 18:59             ` [Bridge] " Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 18:59               ` Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 19:01               ` [Bridge] " Johannes Berg
2008-06-12 19:01                 ` Johannes Berg
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-11 23:18 luisca
2008-06-12 18:13 ` [Bridge] " Stephen Hemminger

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1213294793.6615.16.camel@localhost \
    --to=luisca@cozybit.com \
    --cc=bridge@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=j@w1.fi \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.