Return-path: Received: from crystal.sipsolutions.net ([195.210.38.204]:59659 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751226AbXFNJJz (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2007 05:09:55 -0400 Subject: Re: [Take 2] mac80211 IEEE802.11e/WMM code cleanup From: Johannes Berg To: Zhu Yi Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "John W. Linville" , David Lamparter In-Reply-To: <1181635570.4758.22.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> References: <20070611085950.GA5540@mail.intel.com> <1181584907.29767.30.camel@johannes.berg> <1181635570.4758.22.camel@debian.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-Xg72uLcrSD4cVBNYp05D" Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 09:36:47 +0200 Message-Id: <1181806608.9058.22.camel@johannes.berg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-Xg72uLcrSD4cVBNYp05D Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alright, let me try to summarise what we want as API for DLS: * NL80211_CMD_GET_DLS_PEER doit: simple boolean answer: is DLS set up with given peer? dump: give all DLS peers * NL80211_CMD_SET_DLS_PEER [_CMD_REQUEST_DLS] request setup of DLS * NL80211_CMD_NEW_DLS_PEER kernel notification about a newly setup DLS connection * NL80211_CMD_DEL_DLS_PEER [_CMD_TEARDOWN_DLS] request teardown of DLS connection * NL80211_CMD_NEW_DLS_REQUEST kernel notification for DLS request from the other side * NL80211_CMD_SET_DLS_REQUEST send DLS response to given peer with given status (* NL80211_CMD_GET_DLS_REQUEST * NL80211_CMD_DEL_DLS_REQUEST make no sense) I tried ordering these by get/set/new/del quads as David suggested but I don't think it makes sense for DLS request, I suppose we have somewhat different requirements and I think I'd rather have different names as in brackets above. Then again, that could get confusing with _CMD_REQUEST_DLS and _CMD_NEW_DLS_REQUEST... For me, that settles the DLS API. That API is easily implementable by the userspace MLME as well. Now, for TS, it seems that most of the work is with handling the response to an ADD TS request. Also, the current code doesn't seem to allow using TCLAS or TCLAS processing information for the ADDTS request frame. For the response, I suppose you'll be adding it, but I'm not sure we want to have all the complexity for the request. Maybe we should simply require the ADDTS/DELTS request frames to be injected and we handle the responses with some notifications via nl80211? johannes --=-Xg72uLcrSD4cVBNYp05D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iD8DBQBGcPAP/ETPhpq3jKURAhpiAJ9z7ItWSfRX8BVewPMa3Z3yHhzlfwCdFjZ6 F41WRTHiM8HKxCfsjR3B6vg= =0ivp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-Xg72uLcrSD4cVBNYp05D--