Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com ([209.85.219.228]:39409 "EHLO mail-ew0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752146Ab0BDKHf (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:07:35 -0500 Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so2633683ewy.28 for ; Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:07:34 -0800 (PST) To: Sujith Cc: Felix Fietkau , linux-wireless , Luis Rodriguez , "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: fix PAE frame handling References: <4B65F735.1020509@openwrt.org> <19302.24837.154697.822430@gargle.gargle.HOWL> From: Kalle Valo Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 12:07:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: <19302.24837.154697.822430@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (Sujith's message of "Mon\, 1 Feb 2010 10\:35\:09 +0530") Message-ID: <87d40ljov0.fsf@purkki.valot.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Sujith writes: >> ath9k's tx handling code contains a special case for PAE frames, which >> looks like it was intended to be improving reliability by excluding >> them from aggregates. >> What it actually did is the opposite: By assigning a faulty sequence >> number, yet still keeping it as a qos-frame, it caused bogus packet >> reordering, which broke WPA rekeying. >> The special case handling is completely unnecessary, so this patch >> removes it. > > Sending PAE frames as part of an aggregate broke crypto with several APs. Any more information about the problem? For example, what APs are broken? I'm just wondering if we should see this with other hardware also. -- Kalle Valo