On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 17:07 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 10:59 -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > If that's really a problem, yes. 01:00:00:00:00:00 is still better > > > than a pseudo random MAC, IMO. It's immediately obvious to the user > > > that the MAC currently is not set. > > > > How about 44:44:44:44:44:44 like orinoco uses for bogus BSSID? If we > > can, let's not keep creating yet more bogus MAC addresses. > > Either way, the problem is that these will confuse udev if you have two > at the same time, no? the udev script I attached from Fedora 9 already ignores devices with 00:00:00::: so I don't think we'd have a problem with that. Screw the Xerox thing, all zeros is just bogus and tons of stuff treats it that way already. Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
