On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 17:24 -0800, Thomas Pedersen wrote:
> +#define NL80211_MESH_SETUP_VENDOR_IE NL80211_MESH_SETUP_IE
> - NL80211_MESH_SETUP_VENDOR_PATH_SEL_IE,
> + NL80211_MESH_SETUP_IE,
> + NL80211_MESH_SETUP_ENABLE_SECURITY,
Clearly the intent was to be API compatible (ABI is guaranteed anyway),
but that seems to not work this way since the names don't match.
> + if (tb[NL80211_MESH_SETUP_IE]) {
> struct nlattr *ieattr =
> - tb[NL80211_MESH_SETUP_VENDOR_PATH_SEL_IE];
> + tb[NL80211_MESH_SETUP_IE];
> if (!is_valid_ie_attr(ieattr))
> return -EINVAL;
> - setup->vendor_ie = nla_data(ieattr);
> - setup->vendor_ie_len = nla_len(ieattr);
> + setup->ie = nla_data(ieattr);
> + setup->ie_len = nla_len(ieattr);
> + if (eid_in_ie_attr(ieattr, WLAN_EID_RSN))
> + setup->is_secure =
> + nla_get_flag(tb[NL80211_MESH_SETUP_ENABLE_SECURITY]);
That last check seems a bit pointless -- I'd trust userspace (aka allow
it to shoot itself in the foot) and not check that there's RSN
information when it says it wants security -- maybe WAPI will come up
with mesh security at some point ;-)
johannes
--
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
