Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Jouni Malinen <j@xxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 13:13 > To: Peer, Ilan <ilan.peer@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/20] PASN: Add common authentication frame > build/validation functions > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 07:45:29AM +0000, Peer, Ilan wrote: > > > The Comeback After subfield is not included in frames sent by the > > > non-AP STA, so I'll extend this to accept after == -1 as a special case to > cover that. > > > > > > > Maybe we can clarify this in the specification? > > Would you have a more specific suggestion on how the definition should be > clarified? P802.11az/D2.6 defines the subfield to have "0 or 2" as the length > and uses following language to describe it: "Comeback After subfield shall > not be present (i.e. zero octets) in PASN authentication frames from a non- > AP STA." > Reading this again, I think that at least this part is clear enough, so I do not think a change is needed. > That "shall" word is not appropriate in Clause 9, so this should be cleaned up > anyway. It might also be clearer to talk about the first and third PASN > Authentication frame instead of "from a non-AP STA" > especially in this Clause 9 that is supposed to describe the frame format and Agree. > not behavior. If you have some ideas on how this would be easier to notice > and understand, I can request this to be modified once > D3.0 goes out to a ballot. Regards, Ilan. _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
