Return-path: Received: from mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.5]:32970 "EHLO mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965310AbXDGEeF (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Apr 2007 00:34:05 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 21:33:11 -0700 From: Jouni Malinen To: Larry Finger Cc: wireless Subject: Re: RFC: ieee80211: Spamming of log resulting from packets with ExtIV not set Message-ID: <20070407043310.GH16197@jm.kir.nu> References: <4616DD7E.6010606@lwfinger.net> <20070407013848.GG16197@jm.kir.nu> <46171B36.6090108@lwfinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <46171B36.6090108@lwfinger.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 11:16:54PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote: > As far as I can tell, FCS errors are not filtered. I looked at other > wireless drivers, and I can see where zd1211rw filters them, but I have not > yet figured out what routine sets the error bits. Once I have that and > filter them, I'll see if the log messages stop. OK, that would certainly explain large number of TKIP/CCMP errors. It is quite normal to get packet error rate of 5-10% and FCS error detection should take care of most of the incorrect frames that get through without causing some other format error to reject them. I would expect most wlan designs to do FCS error filtering in hardware, so this could be just lack of configuring something differently or dropping frames based on one of the RX flags. If the exact mechanism for this is not known, I would recommend validating FCS in software prior to processing the its contents (or trying to decrypt it for that matter). -- Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA