linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfgang Breyha <wbreyha@gmx.net>
To: Helmut Schaa <helmut.schaa@googlemail.com>
Cc: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux Client vs. CISCO AP with band select
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 17:13:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CEBE834.9000303@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201011201304.48821.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2683 bytes --]

Hi!

On 2010-11-20 13:04, Helmut Schaa wrote:
> If the Cisco APs would reply to direct probes we could (as a workaround) just
> send an additional direct probe here. I agree with Jouni that the AP behavior
> is just stupid but the users will blame Linux for not being able to connect
> and not the AP vendor.
> 
> Wolfgang, could you please try the (untested) patch below if it makes any
> difference?

Sorry, it took me a day longer as promised because I had to stay at home
yesterday.

The patch from Helmut didn't change anything. I even tried to send both
broadcast and direct probes in triples to check if that's the threshold
which is configured in band select as retries. It's not;-)

After that I tried a dirty hack on wpa_supplicant 0.7.3:
-------
--- wpa_supplicant-0.7.3.orig/wpa_supplicant/sme.c	2010-09-07
17:43:39.000000000 +0200
+++ wpa_supplicant-0.7.3/wpa_supplicant/sme.c	2010-11-23
15:21:23.866829986 +0100
@@ -456,8 +456,23 @@
 void sme_event_auth_timed_out(struct wpa_supplicant *wpa_s,
 			      union wpa_event_data *data)
 {
+	int timeout = 5000;
 	wpa_printf(MSG_DEBUG, "SME: Authentication timed out");
-	wpa_supplicant_req_scan(wpa_s, 5, 0);
+	if (wpa_blacklist_add(wpa_s, wpa_s->pending_bssid) == 0) {
+		struct wpa_blacklist *b;
+		wpa_blacklist_add(wpa_s, wpa_s->pending_bssid);
+		b = wpa_blacklist_get(wpa_s, wpa_s->pending_bssid);
+		if (b && b->count < 3) {
+			/*
+			 * Speed up next attempt if there could be other APs
+			 * that could accept association.
+			 */
+			timeout = 100;
+		}
+	}
+	wpa_supplicant_req_scan(wpa_s, timeout / 1000,
+				1000 * (timeout % 1000));
+//	wpa_supplicant_req_scan(wpa_s, 5, 0);
 }


--------
In other words I reused the code found in sme_event_assoc_reject() to
add the BSSID to the blacklist. To speed up things further I add it
twice;-) I don't know why wpa_supplicant needs a blacklist count of 2 to
finally try an other BSSID.

And it helps a lot. With this change wpa_supplicant stops retrying the
same BSSID all the time and tries a 5GHz one pretty fast. And I think
that's exactly what CISCO tries to achieve.

Finally there is another timeout in the EAP stage (SUPP_BE) I can't
pinpoint. I attached the wpa_supplicant.log.

Authenticated once reauthentication works very fast if needed.

Knowing where to search and how to hack mac80211 and wpa_supplicant I'll
try to find some details which probes CISCO responds to reaching the
threshold.

I can still provide packet traces if you need/want them. In case of the
load balancing feature it may take some time because I've not found a
trick to provoke it. But I think a well and fast trained blacklist will
help in this case, too.

Greetings,
Wolfgang

[-- Attachment #2: wpa_eap.log.gz --]
[-- Type: application/x-gzip, Size: 3196 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-11-23 16:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-19 21:22 Linux Client vs. CISCO AP with band select Wolfgang Breyha
2010-11-19 21:45 ` Dan Williams
2010-11-20 11:27 ` Jouni Malinen
2010-11-20 12:04   ` Helmut Schaa
2010-11-20 16:49     ` Wolfgang Breyha
2010-11-20 21:24       ` Jouni Malinen
2010-11-23 16:13     ` Wolfgang Breyha [this message]
2010-11-24 14:56       ` Wolfgang Breyha
2010-11-25 16:47         ` Jouni Malinen
2010-11-25 17:50           ` Jouni Malinen
2010-11-25 21:18       ` Jouni Malinen
2010-11-25 23:24         ` Wolfgang Breyha
2010-11-26  9:48           ` Jouni Malinen

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=4CEBE834.9000303@gmx.net \
    --to=wbreyha@gmx.net \
    --cc=helmut.schaa@googlemail.com \
    --cc=j@w1.fi \
    --cc=linux-wireless@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).