On Wed, 2016-03-23 at 07:24 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > On 03/23/2016 06:41 AM, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 19:12 -0400, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > > From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This gives configurable control over whether to consider > > > roaming based on scan results. I find this useful when > > > doing explicit roaming tests, where I do not want scan > > > requests to cause the roam automatically. > > Manually triggered ones, or *all* scan requests even background > > ones? > I believe my patch would be for all scan results. In my particular > case, I really care only about manual scans and external scans, > so if that makes the patch more useful for others, I can see if there > is > a way to distinguish one scan from another. Because there's already the flag to prevent roam on manual (eg, control interface initiated) scan requests, I was asking to clarify if you explicitly wanted to allow it to be disabled for all scans. The only downside I see here is that with this patch/option, the supplicant will never roam, and there's no official command to request roaming either (except the testing one, which is IIRC only supposed to be used for testing...). Dan _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
