[PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

---
 scan.c |    6 ++++++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/scan.c b/scan.c
index 9b58c29..206b6e8 100644
--- a/scan.c
+++ b/scan.c
@@ -176,6 +176,11 @@ static void print_country(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
 	printf("\n");
 }
 
+static void print_powerconstraint(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
+{
+	printf(" %d db\n", data[0]);
+}
+
 static void print_erp(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
 {
 	if (data[0] == 0x00)
@@ -407,6 +412,7 @@ static const struct ie_print ieprinters[] = {
 	[3] = { "DS Paramater set", print_ds, 1, 1, },
 	[5] = PRINT_IGN,
 	[7] = { "Country", print_country, 3, 255, },
+	[32] = { "Power constraint", print_powerconstraint, 1, 1, },
 	[42] = { "ERP", print_erp, 1, 255, },
 	[48] = { "RSN", print_rsn, 2, 255, },
 	[50] = { "Extended supported rates", print_supprates, 0, 255, },
-- 
1.6.0.6

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 258 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 09:06 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>  
> +static void print_powerconstraint(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
> +{
> +	printf(" %d db\n", data[0]);

s/db/dB/ -- fixed, applied and pushed, thanks.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > +static void print_powerconstraint(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
> > +{
> > +	printf(" %d db\n", data[0]);
> 
> s/db/dB/ -- fixed, applied and pushed, thanks.

so how sure are you that you pushed it? I don't see it.

Regards

Marcel

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 415 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 09:35 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
> 
> > > +static void print_powerconstraint(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
> > > +{
> > > +	printf(" %d db\n", data[0]);
> > 
> > s/db/dB/ -- fixed, applied and pushed, thanks.
> 
> so how sure are you that you pushed it? I don't see it.

Sorry, seems I didn't hit enter. Definitely pushed now.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > > > +static void print_powerconstraint(const uint8_t type, uint8_t len, const uint8_t *data)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	printf(" %d db\n", data[0]);
> > > 
> > > s/db/dB/ -- fixed, applied and pushed, thanks.
> > 
> > so how sure are you that you pushed it? I don't see it.
> 
> Sorry, seems I didn't hit enter. Definitely pushed now.

just re-based and added the patch for the WPA/RSN length checks. So we
should be good now in this area.

Regards

Marcel

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 339 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 09:50 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:

> just re-based and added the patch for the WPA/RSN length checks. So we
> should be good now in this area.

Thanks, applied, and really pushed out now.

Do you think I should cut a new release with all the shiny new parsing
code, or will you work on more :)

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > just re-based and added the patch for the WPA/RSN length checks. So we
> > should be good now in this area.
> 
> Thanks, applied, and really pushed out now.
> 
> Do you think I should cut a new release with all the shiny new parsing
> code, or will you work on more :)

the only thing that bugs me is this:

BSS 00:1c:f0:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
	TSF: 3332683470455 usec (38d, 13:44:43)
	freq: 2422
	beacon interval: 100
	capability: ESS Privacy ShortPreamble ShortSlotTime (0x0431)
	signal: -36.00 dBm
	SSID: Big in Japan
	Supported rates: 1.0* 2.0* 5.5* 11.0* 
	DS Paramater set: channel 3
	Country: CA (in/outdoor), data: 01 0b 1b
	ERP: <no flags>
	Extended supported rates: 6.0* 9.0 12.0* 18.0 24.0* 36.0 48.0 54.0 
	RSN:	 * Version: 1
		 * Group cipher: CCMP
		 * Pairwise ciphers: CCMP
		 * Authentication suites: PSK
		 * Capabilities: 0x0000
	WMM: parameter: 01 00 00 03 a4 00 00 27 a4 00 00 42 43 5e 00 62 32 2f 00
	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 33 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 34 03 00 05 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
	Unknown IE (45): 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 00 00 00
	Unknown IE (61): 03 00 01 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
	WPS:	 * Version: 1.0
		 * Manufacturer: D-Link Systems
		 * Model: DIR-615
		 * Device name: Wireless N Router
		 * Config methods: Label

I didn't find any specs to decode IE 45 and 61 since all of them mark
these as reserved. Not sure if these are defined in future specs or if
they are deprecated IE. And it seems its data is similar to what is in
the vendor specific elements.

The other one that keeps showing up in my area is:

	Unknown IE (47): 06

And I do have some other vendor specific ones, that I don't really care
about and we might even never know what they are:

	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 01 01 00 17 00 00
	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 02 01 01 4d 00 03 a4 00 00
	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:2f, data: 01 00 01

However, as I said before, I am quite happy now since the provided
information by iw are now the same as I get with iwlist. Actually iw has
now superior decoding capabilities and is more useful. There is still
room for improvement, but I think cutting a new release is not a bad
idea.

Regards

Marcel

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > just re-based and added the patch for the WPA/RSN length checks. So we
> > should be good now in this area.
> 
> Thanks, applied, and really pushed out now.
> 
> Do you think I should cut a new release with all the shiny new parsing
> code, or will you work on more :)

one other thing that comes to my mind is to have a convenient "iw scan"
alias to just trigger scanning all all interfaces. The "dev wlan0" thing
is driving my crazy. And most people just have one card only anyway.

Do we really need the "dev" versus "phy" details here. I guess they are
needed in case someone renames "wlan0" to "phy0" by accident, but
personally I prefer that the "dev" one is optional and it falls back to
just use the interface name.

Regards

Marcel

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2028 bytes --]

Hi,

> 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 33 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 34 03 00 05 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 	Unknown IE (45): 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 	Unknown IE (61): 03 00 01 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> 	WPS:	 * Version: 1.0
> 		 * Manufacturer: D-Link Systems
> 		 * Model: DIR-615
> 		 * Device name: Wireless N Router
> 		 * Config methods: Label
> 
> I didn't find any specs to decode IE 45 and 61 since all of them mark
> these as reserved. Not sure if these are defined in future specs or if
> they are deprecated IE. And it seems its data is similar to what is in
> the vendor specific elements.

Both are HT.

> The other one that keeps showing up in my area is:
> 
> 	Unknown IE (47): 06

"Broadcom proprietary" -- seems it would make sense to ignore that.

> And I do have some other vendor specific ones, that I don't really care
> about and we might even never know what they are:
> 
> 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 01 01 00 17 00 00
> 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 02 01 01 4d 00 03 a4 00 00
> 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:2f, data: 01 00 01

You can check wireshark, sometimes it has something useful. I think
there are pre-wifi HT IEs too in some vendor IE, might be one of these.

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents?x_dcn=31&x_year=2009 is useful
too (at least for 2009, for next year somebody will have to find the DCN
again)

> However, as I said before, I am quite happy now since the provided
> information by iw are now the same as I get with iwlist. Actually iw has
> now superior decoding capabilities and is more useful. 

:)

> There is still
> room for improvement, but I think cutting a new release is not a bad
> idea.

I'll wait a bit, maybe somebody feels inspired by this to provide HT
parsing.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 33 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:90:4c, data: 34 03 00 05 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 	Unknown IE (45): 0c 10 1f ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 	Unknown IE (61): 03 00 01 00 00 00 0f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 	WPS:	 * Version: 1.0
> > 		 * Manufacturer: D-Link Systems
> > 		 * Model: DIR-615
> > 		 * Device name: Wireless N Router
> > 		 * Config methods: Label
> > 
> > I didn't find any specs to decode IE 45 and 61 since all of them mark
> > these as reserved. Not sure if these are defined in future specs or if
> > they are deprecated IE. And it seems its data is similar to what is in
> > the vendor specific elements.
> 
> Both are HT.

do we have the specs somewhere then I might can give it a try. Also WMM
needs some improvements.

> > The other one that keeps showing up in my area is:
> > 
> > 	Unknown IE (47): 06
> 
> "Broadcom proprietary" -- seems it would make sense to ignore that.

Since it not showing up until you give -u there is no need to ignore it,
but where do you find that this is Broadcom proprietary and why the f*
they get to use an official IE number?

> > And I do have some other vendor specific ones, that I don't really care
> > about and we might even never know what they are:
> > 
> > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 01 01 00 17 00 00
> > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 02 01 01 4d 00 03 a4 00 00
> > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:2f, data: 01 00 01
> 
> You can check wireshark, sometimes it has something useful. I think
> there are pre-wifi HT IEs too in some vendor IE, might be one of these.
> 
> https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents?x_dcn=31&x_year=2009 is useful
> too (at least for 2009, for next year somebody will have to find the DCN
> again)

I found an indication of what bit 1 of extended capabilities means. I do
have seen an AP with that somewhere around :)

Regards

Marcel

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1650 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 10:48 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:

> > Both are HT.
> 
> do we have the specs somewhere then I might can give it a try. Also WMM
> needs some improvements.

The IEs are defined in structs in include/linux/ieee80211.h.

> > > The other one that keeps showing up in my area is:
> > > 
> > > 	Unknown IE (47): 06
> > 
> > "Broadcom proprietary" -- seems it would make sense to ignore that.
> 
> Since it not showing up until you give -u there is no need to ignore it,
> but where do you find that this is Broadcom proprietary and why the f*
> they get to use an official IE number?

Check the link I gave you - lots of companies have IEs rather than
vendor IEs, predates the vendor IE I guess.

> > > And I do have some other vendor specific ones, that I don't really care
> > > about and we might even never know what they are:
> > > 
> > > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 01 01 00 17 00 00
> > > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:7f, data: 02 01 01 4d 00 03 a4 00 00
> > > 	Vendor specific: OUI 00:03:2f, data: 01 00 01
> > 
> > You can check wireshark, sometimes it has something useful. I think
> > there are pre-wifi HT IEs too in some vendor IE, might be one of these.
> > 
> > https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents?x_dcn=31&x_year=2009 is useful
> > too (at least for 2009, for next year somebody will have to find the DCN
> > again)
> 
> I found an indication of what bit 1 of extended capabilities means. I do
> have seen an AP with that somewhere around :)

Actually extended capabilities aren't bits but values, I think? But
that's something about HT too, iirc.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 459 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 20:03 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 10:48 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> 
> > > Both are HT.
> > 
> > do we have the specs somewhere then I might can give it a try. Also WMM
> > needs some improvements.
> 
> The IEs are defined in structs in include/linux/ieee80211.h.

Oh and iw already has some code (in info.c or phy.c?) since the data we
transfer for HT capabilities is the HT caps IE.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Johannes Berg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 702 bytes --]

On Mon, 2009-05-04 at 10:23 -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:

> one other thing that comes to my mind is to have a convenient "iw scan"
> alias to just trigger scanning all all interfaces. The "dev wlan0" thing
> is driving my crazy. And most people just have one card only anyway.

That would be hell to coordinate with all the waiting and stuff...

> Do we really need the "dev" versus "phy" details here. I guess they are
> needed in case someone renames "wlan0" to "phy0" by accident, but
> personally I prefer that the "dev" one is optional and it falls back to
> just use the interface name.

Personally, I'd rather have bash completion ;) And it's not so simple I
think.

johannes

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] add support for showing power constraint IE

[Marcel Holtmann]

Hi Johannes,

> > However, as I said before, I am quite happy now since the provided
> > information by iw are now the same as I get with iwlist. Actually iw has
> > now superior decoding capabilities and is more useful. 
> 
> :)
> 
> > There is still
> > room for improvement, but I think cutting a new release is not a bad
> > idea.
> 
> I'll wait a bit, maybe somebody feels inspired by this to provide HT
> parsing.

I am running out of time that I can spent on this. So don't expect me to
do it any time soon.

Regards

Marcel