On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 10:49 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> Whitelisting and blacklisting the same SSID would be one of the
> "illegal" cases that we may want to reject with -EINVAL.
>
> But my idea was that you could do this:
>
> MATCH={SSID=foo} and
> NOT_MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05}
>
> or
>
> MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
> NOT_MATCH={SSID=foo}
>
> or, making more sense:
>
> MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
> NOT_MATCH={MIN_RSSI=-70}
>
> My point is that many of these combinations might not make sense, but
> generalizing the API allows for cases that *do* make sense but we have
> not thought of yet.
Good point :)
> > > I also prefer using match/not_match (couldn't find a better antonym),
> > > because "filter" is ambiguous (let-through or leave-out?).
> >
> > agree.
>
> We could also use a single list like this:
>
> FILTER={1={MATCH=true, SSID=foo}, 2={MATCH=false, BSSID=...}
>
> But then we're becoming a bit too "netfiltery". :P What do you think?
Heh. Don't really care :)
I guess the thing to keep in mind is that it's all an optimisation and
if a device can't support certain combinations it doesn't really
matter :)
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
