From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f175.google.com (mail-pl1-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E3CE14F6E for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2024 14:40:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="IoYZVFuv" Received: by mail-pl1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1d3f3ee00a2so32495155ad.3 for ; Tue, 02 Jan 2024 06:40:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704206434; x=1704811234; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HMPPZ9isJOyKmrCvD3NkxkhoXBxQ9ko/juAvZBp2cE8=; b=IoYZVFuvvHfpzqwZlEon30YVot6KFiJBLXPNoeSryixlEwN1hSJ9vTJY9DYjUOJdWA ieVolMdy8oJZ1metTMMH1yjHnjm6I0B47AmZvIiSioDuWlaDcZM0uyUt6GOQ5n+1iRAM OXTF9YmkT9xWAkZjc4ygqtS/Pgsw55NTxXbvur2k0uyFOID+6ByJmurXWY9zQ5LjJ7FQ v0i/lrhUaOYtUxb3ghrGq3ENZ4Lb45skqAphpxrTFOePBGezwPNIRWXfFyWuAE07Mc7t d+qjPyCaOM9BCQENswaJ1ZlivKa7TYOi/hjn/qynYsSMiUfPs1VJyXRrQTWZeN9EX8vI d6qg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704206434; x=1704811234; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HMPPZ9isJOyKmrCvD3NkxkhoXBxQ9ko/juAvZBp2cE8=; b=xMoRUVixli/taaakg/k5AEpsVqRNFoG4deA86S3ALov+DQqQtgZlmbEO4hX6dpkeJW 1gEeCdXFg7xXLWBKx91iWLXnTZ+hClCxLxzqo59p56+gypg0YLo0NLBAShJd51Fgezid 3+LX63mJ3nezc1RfL12BX8j8ap8zspVrd+GN/N23tpALuy6ME8q2/nvw6Hgn0dDbcfDr WipFP52QSVI7uUmu2UJ5bCtYUmxK1xva5biebbzi1+jxmU+Ti7ueckZWZ633zteuVkXm nlG8H9OEuiFKqUAcOvmR9qwgvDyF2TG/Vg8santZK4NOddszhe2eyZmRzkAEP23gpqv3 2h3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YztR08Nm+4r7+CwV0x7+QQOi1j+GjobEVgPtwnpLEq8ijsYFxJ/ 1WBIru2dObxgCcRU/YBPJASiEQxzSR0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHQklCP4AbQxdpJV2W2rnttxNWtC6CwIpIswwZYhqy1Cxe42nLMgJdgy5UHn0lG3OFPWsf1Qw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:400d:b0:28c:8f7a:2e20 with SMTP id ie13-20020a17090b400d00b0028c8f7a2e20mr3392797pjb.67.1704206434155; Tue, 02 Jan 2024 06:40:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.254.82] ([50.39.172.77]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y31-20020a17090a53a200b0028649b84907sm29071385pjh.16.2024.01.02.06.40.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Jan 2024 06:40:33 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 06:40:32 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iwd@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Setup help request Content-Language: en-US To: Mauro Condarelli , iwd@lists.linux.dev References: <5b97b06f-5047-4a1e-958d-27a6185ba504@mclink.it> <2aaed79f-9fae-4750-8e85-994a48a45da1@mclink.it> From: James Prestwood In-Reply-To: <2aaed79f-9fae-4750-8e85-994a48a45da1@mclink.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Mauro, On 1/2/24 6:07 AM, Mauro Condarelli wrote: > Thanks James, > comments inline below. > > On 1/2/24 14:01, James Prestwood wrote: >> Hi Mauro, >> >> On 1/1/24 4:34 PM, Mauro Condarelli wrote: >>> Hi James, >>> Thanks for the fast reply. >>> >>> Comments inline below. >>> >>> On 1/2/24 00:03, James Prestwood wrote: >>>> Hi Mauro, >>>> >>>> On 1/1/24 11:26 AM, Mauro Condarelli wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> I just installed `IWD version 2.3` on a small MiniPC (Beelink, if >>>>> it matters) sporting a >>>>> `Intel Corporation Wireless 3165 (rev 81)` PCI Wireless adapter. >>>>> O.S. is a fairly up-to-date "Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)" >>>>> Installation was done via standard Debian package (`apt install iwd`) >>>>> ======8<----------- SNIP >>> I used the following script to reproducibly start IWD and friends: >>> --------------------------------- >>> root@lxd:~# cat ./start_iwd.sh >>> #!/bin/bash >>> >>> /usr/libexec/iwd -d >/tmp/iwd.log 2>&1 & >>> IWD_PID=$! >>> >>> sleep 5 >>> iwctl device list >>> iwctl device wlan0 set-property Mode ap >>> iwctl ap wlan0 start-profile beelink >>> iwctl ap wlan0 show >>> >>> iwmon --write /tmp/iwmon.pcap >/tmp/iwmon.log 2>&1 & >>> IWMON_PID=$! >>> >>> mc >>> >>> kill $IWMON_PID >>> kill $IWD_PID >>> --------------------------------- >>> >>> While shell was active I: >>> - opened Fritz! `WLAN` app >>>   - it took ~30s to see a `beelink` network apparently spanning >>> several channels >>> - tried to connect from my desktop >>>   - it did see a `beelink` AP a long time (>2m) after `WLAN` app saw >>> it. >>>   - it tried several times to connect. >>>   - it never succeeded. >>>   - it didn't even ask for a passphrase. >>> - tried to connect using my Android Phone (the ssame running `WLAN`. >>>   - it never saw a `beelink` AP to attempt connection. >>> >>> I attach all logs I took. >>> I changed password to "temp-password" so it can be shared as needed. >> >> I think there is more going on but for starters it appears whatever >> app your using to scan is sending an invalid probe request frame. >> This causes IWD to ignore it which seems like the reason you cant >> even see the AP in the scans. I've attached a patch you can test, but >> I'm not sure this is something we can really upstream since its out >> of spec. The concerning IE is Extended capabilities, this is >> something IWD actually uses and parses, so the fact there is a >> duplicate and each one is different makes it impossible to know which >> one we should use. The probe request is including multiple entries >> for "Extended Capabilities" and "FILS Request Parameters (tag 258)". >> With the patch applied, and some other modifications to iwmon you can >> see two entries for these IEs: >> >>                     Extended Capabilities: len 10 >>                         Capability: bit  2: Extended channel switching >>                         Capability: bit 17: WNM-Sleep mode >>                         Capability: bit 19: BSS transition >>                         Capability: bit 25: SSID list >>                         Capability: bit 46: WNM- Notification >>                         Capability: bit 62: Opmode Notification >>                         04 00 0a 02 00 40 00 40 80 >> 01                    .....@.@.. >>                     Tag 258: len 2 >>                         00 >> 12                                            .. >>                     Extended Capabilities: len 10 >>                         Capability: bit 17: WNM-Sleep mode >>                         Capability: bit 19: BSS transition >>                         Capability: bit 25: SSID list >>                         Capability: bit 46: WNM- Notification >>                         00 00 0a 02 00 40 00 00 00 >> 01                    .....@.... >>                     Tag 258: len 2 >>                         00 ff >> >> If this patch doesn't resolve the issue could you re-run the test and >> start iwmon at the very beginning, prior to starting IWD? > I'll do it ASAP, but it will take a bit of time since I'll have to > compile from sources (I installed from standard Debian package). > > Notice I'm not using anything "strange" for scans: > - normal Debian Sid Network Manager applet from desktop (which sees > "beelink") > - normal Android phone `WiFi` Settings from phone (MIUI 12.0.3 on > POCOPHONE F1, if relevant) (does *not* see "beelink") > Both are working as expected with several other Access Points. > It seems (to my limited insight) unlikely they're sending invalid > probe requests. I'll need to look more at the spec to determine if this is "illegal" (for lack of a better term) to duplicate these IEs. There are some IEs that we allow duplicates of (which you can see in that patch). With a simple search I cant find anything in the spec that disallows duplicates specifically, but we have this comment in IWD: "Tag found, make sure no duplicates present unless allowed" Denis, any idea where that comes from off the top of your head? Thanks, James