Hi Johannes,
> > It is assumed that such restrictions are enforced by user space.
> > Furthermore, it is assumed, that if the conditions that allowed for
> > the operation of the GO on such a channel change, i.e., the station
> > interface disconnected from the AP, it is the responsibility of user
> > space to evacuate the GO from the channel.
>
> For the latter here, don't we need some sort of flag with userspace saying
> "trust me, I know what I'm doing"? Or put another way - how does this not
> make us break compliance when running with old versions of
> wpa_supplicant?
>
I do not think that this will be needed, as current wpa_supplicant logic is not aware of the GO_CONCURRENT and INDOOR_ONLY flags (leaving them ignored) and does not allow instantiating an AP/GO on channels marked with NO_IR. In addition as this feature must be enabled under CONFIG_ONUS, I expect that whoever uses it uses know what's is doing.
Such logic might be needed if kernel enforces regulatory compliance after the GO_CONCURRENT relaxation conditions are no longer met (station interface leaves the channel), where if such a case is true, it would be appropriate to add an indication to the kernel telling it that user space knows what it's doing, so the kernel will not do any quiescing logic (similar to what Luis suggested).
Regards,
Ilan.
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���zW����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
