On Monday 05 February 2007 12:49, Johannes Berg wrote: > > Let's make monitor interfaces > > resemble monitoring ethernet a little more by reporting both RXed frames > > and TXed frames. *BSD does this too and it makes running ethereal on > > monitor interfaces much more useful. > > We do this right now afaik. > Where? I don't remember getting TX frames when running ethereal on a monitor interface. > > TX frame reporting can be done simply in the > > ieee80211_tx_status call, allowing the TX status to be reported on real > > frames. > > I don't quite understand this comment. TX status reporting should go via > nl80211. > If we report TXed frames at the point when the driver calls ieee80211_tx_status, we know whether or not an ack was received. This information can be added to the TX frame that is reported to the monitor interface. > > Doing this is actually somewhat orthogonal to packet injection via > > netlink or monitor interface, but if we are reporting TXed frames with a > > radiotap header, we might as well allow frame injection with a radiotap > > frame for consistency. > > Well, it hasn't got much merit because for anything useful you'll need > to get state information on nl80211. > I'm not sure what you mean. The program can get the configuration info it needs from nl80211/cfg80211/WE and send/inject frames through the monitor interface. -Michael Wu
Attachment:
pgphai1lGPHQd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
