On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 17:13 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2012-08-06 5:06 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 17:02 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > > > >> >> If you're going to require them to be bound to an AP though, where's the > >> >> difference to the current 4-addr AP_VLAN behaviour? It seems with that > >> >> you could actually implement a bound-to-AP-WDS entirely in userspace > >> >> since there's no requirement to actually go through the auth/assoc > >> >> sequence for hostapd to add the station entry? > >> > > >> > Oh and if you actually do need WDS-type interfaces, maybe their role > >> > should change to be virtual like AP_VLAN-type interfaces? > > > >> The difference between WDS and 4-addr AP_VLAN is that WDS is AP<->AP, > >> not AP<->STA. I guess it would be possible to write some code to create > >> AP VLANs + station entries for remote APs based on cooked monitor mode > >> based discovery or some form of mgmt frame exchange. > > > > I was thinking just pre-configure it as you have to anyway now? > Well, when creating station entries manually, it has to know the HT > capabilities, etc. > With my incomplete fixes (which are being used on OpenWrt), those are > automatically extracted from the remote AP's beacons, so that needs less > preconfiguration. Ah yes, but hostapd could do that as well since it always receives OBSS beacons (via cooked monitor or nl80211 beacon reporting) Anyway, I don't mind WDS special interfaces, I just have a feeling we might be better served by AP_VLAN since they're implicitly handled in mac80211 and don't need driver support etc. 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
