From: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211/cfg80211: add ssid filtering for sched_scan
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:49:22 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1314776962.2296.540.camel@cumari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1314776396.4161.19.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:39 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 10:30 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote:
>
> > > Ok. I think the BSSID blacklist would just be a separate attribute, I
> > > see no reason to have a nesting for that.
> >
> > Actually, we could make the filter and blacklisting very generic. We
> > can use the same attributes for both. The only difference would be that
> > the former would include anything that matches and the latter would
> > exclude anything that matches.
>
> Hm, true, but does it really make sense to blacklist SSIDs when we have
> a whitelist for them? Or would you want to whitelist a wildcard and then
> blacklist a specific one?
Whitelisting and blacklisting the same SSID would be one of the
"illegal" cases that we may want to reject with -EINVAL.
But my idea was that you could do this:
MATCH={SSID=foo} and
NOT_MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05}
or
MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
NOT_MATCH={SSID=foo}
or, making more sense:
MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
NOT_MATCH={MIN_RSSI=-70}
My point is that many of these combinations might not make sense, but
generalizing the API allows for cases that *do* make sense but we have
not thought of yet.
> > I also prefer using match/not_match (couldn't find a better antonym),
> > because "filter" is ambiguous (let-through or leave-out?).
>
> agree.
We could also use a single list like this:
FILTER={1={MATCH=true, SSID=foo}, 2={MATCH=false, BSSID=...}
But then we're becoming a bit too "netfiltery". :P What do you think?
--
Cheers,
Luca.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-31 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-30 12:39 [PATCH] nl80211/cfg80211: add ssid filtering for sched_scan Luciano Coelho
2011-08-30 14:16 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-30 15:27 ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-30 16:09 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31 6:09 ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31 6:20 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31 7:30 ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31 7:39 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31 7:49 ` Luciano Coelho [this message]
2011-08-31 7:53 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31 7:54 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31 8:03 ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31 8:08 ` Luciano Coelho
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=1314776962.2296.540.camel@cumari \
--to=coelho@ti.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox