> Yes, I agree with you, and this patch is just to check whether this PREQ is valid with
> the ttl it contains instead of local TTL, and the local TTL has also been provided for
> PREP further process.
I'm still unconvinced with that change. The ttl check you refer to is done on
transmission: PREQs with ttl of zero are never transmitted. See further down in
that same function:
ttl = PREQ_IE_TTL(preq_elem);
lifetime = PREQ_IE_LIFETIME(preq_elem);
if (ttl <= 1) {
/* supress frame */
Furthermore, with the change you propose, you open the possibility for PREPs to
be transmitted with ttl=0 (if ifmsh->mshcfg.dot11MeshTTL was set to zero).
Regarding your baselen explanation, I now understand it and agree to the
suggested change. Your initial patch submission was reversed and I got confused
looking at two version of the same.
I've created a new series with the parts of your patch that I agree with. They
follow this e-mail.
Thanks!
Javier
--
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
