On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 15:29 +0100, Andy Green wrote: > > I have a new idea. Maybe it will turn out to have fatal design or > > implementation problems, but anyway. > But for any nontrivial use, you need to capture RX and not blindly > inject, and so you have a monitor mode interface up anyway. The > footprint in the political networking space is less if it just goes in > as a monitor mode TX action. In addition, we still have the problem with receiving encrypted eapol frames etc. that we really need to see unencrypted but can't make it to the network interface. I'm still for using netlink. It's just a socket too after all, and what's the conceptual difference between packing network packets into other packets or packing them into netlink messages? I don't see why people are so dead set against using nl80211 for the userspace MLME needs including frame stuff. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
