On 20/12/2018 11:23, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 11:24:01AM +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) wrote: >> The Wi-Fi Alliance Multi-AP Specification v1.0 allows onboarding of a >> backhaul STA through WPS. To enable this, the WPS registrar offers a >> different set of credentials (backhaul credentials instead of fronthaul >> credentials) when the Multi-AP subelement is present in the WFA vendor >> extension element of the WSC M1 message. >> >> Add 3 new configuration options to specify the backhaul credentials for >> the hostapd internal registrar: multi_ap_backhaul_ssid, >> multi_ap_backhaul_wpa_psk, multi_ap_backhaul_wpa_passphrase. These are >> only relevant for a fronthaul SSID, i.e. where multi_ap is set to 2 or >> 3. When these options are set, pass the backhaul credentials instead of >> the normal credentials when the Multi-AP subelement is present. >> >> Ignore the Multi-AP subelement if the backhaul config options are not >> set. Note that for an SSID which is fronthaul and backhaul at the same >> time (i.e., multi_ap == 3), this results in the correct credentials >> being sent anyway. >> >> The security to be used for the backaul BSS is fixed to WPA2PSK. The >> Multi-AP Specification only allows Open and WPA2PSK networks to be >> configured. Although not stated explicitly, the backhaul link is >> intended to be always encrypted, hence WPA2PSK. >> >> To build the credentials, the credential-building code is essentially >> copied and simplified. Indeed, the backhaul credentials are always >> WPA2PSK and never use per-device PSK. All the options set for the >> fronthaul BSS WPS are simply ignored. > > This looks mostly reasonable to me, but needs some coding style cleanup. Could you give me a hint about what kind of cleanup is needed? Since there is no coding style document, I'm probably not aware of some of the issues. > That said, I want to apply this with the wpa_supplicant side > functionality in 10/12 and some hwsim test cases, I'll try to add some test cases. Is it better to do that as a separate patch, or together with the rest? Also, do you like tests of corner cases that are not clearly specified by the Multi-AP Specification (where the test case is a kind of documentation of the choice we made), or do you prefer to avoid those because they'd have to be changed if we decide to do it differently in the end? Since you added test_multi_ap_fronthaul_on_ap, I guess you prefer the former? Regards, Arnout > so I'll leave this > waiting for the patch 10/12 discussion to conclude. > > Similarly, I'll drop 12/12 for now since it depends on how the design in > 10/12 is addressed in the end. > _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
