From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: wireless@lists.tuxdriver.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] cfg80211 and nl80211
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:24:51 +0100
References: <20070131013717.GA28076@tuxdriver.com>
	<200701302146.05289.flamingice@sourmilk.net>
	<20070131183713.10999c74@griffin.suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20070131183713.10999c74@griffin.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200701312124.52006.mb@bu3sch.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: wireless-bounces@tuxdriver.com
Errors-To: wireless-bounces@tuxdriver.com

On Wednesday 31 January 2007 18:37, Jiri Benc wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:46:01 -0500, Michael Wu wrote:
> > I think drivers that currently support frame injection do it by allowing TX on 
> > a monitor interface w/ AVS or radiotap header. I would rather have this than 
> > requiring the use of NL80211 to inject frames since userspace won't have to 
> > do as much to continue supporting frame injection. It also makes more sense 
> > to me. Status notification can be done by a 802.11 ACK frame. Radiotap might 
> > need to be extended to support toggling the ACK frame reporting for TX and 
> > whatever else userspace wants to set.
> 
> Please, don't do that. You need to get a success/failure report from
> the driver/stack. Doing that by dumping fake frames through the network
> interfaces isn't something I could consider as a right behaviour. Also,
> you need to match the sent frame and the report from the driver. This
> gets really tricky when you use network interfaces.

TX control information also needs to be passed somehow.
So you would require some TXcontrol header or something
like that for the injected data. Not really scalable.

-- 
Greetings Michael.
_______________________________________________
wireless mailing list
wireless@lists.tuxdriver.org
http://lists.tuxdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless