On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 00:54 -0700, Michael Wu wrote: > This part seems fairly evil. I suspect a better solution here is to allow > unencrypted frames when the interface is dormant (netif_dormant()) and then > we might be able to get rid of the specific check for WEP. Might that address Tomas's concern with EAPOL too? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
