Return-path: Received: from mail.atheros.com ([12.36.123.2]:54480 "EHLO mail.atheros.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750935AbZCMEsD (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:48:03 -0400 Received: from mail.atheros.com ([10.10.20.86]) by sidewinder.atheros.com for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:48:02 -0700 From: Sujith MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: <18873.58504.252509.729185@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (sfid-20090313_054818_787315_70D8DB56) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:13:52 +0530 To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , Dan Williams , Jouni Malinen , Johannes Berg Subject: Re: Which APs to disregards from in inputting into the bss list In-Reply-To: <43e72e890903122118p5533bb4eke512f947c8879edf@mail.gmail.com> References: <43e72e890903122009h25c7f6d9qcf4365ec32532e31@mail.gmail.com> <18873.53124.115355.862512@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <43e72e890903122118p5533bb4eke512f947c8879edf@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Sujith wrote: > > Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >> Do we want to ignore certain APs if we determine they are bogus? An > >> example is 11n APs with WEP/TKIP. > > > > They are not bogus, we just fall back to legacy association. > > What if its HT only. > It should deny association, since we send only legacy capabilities in our assoc request. But I doubt that HT-only APs exist. Sujith