Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:36721 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752899Ab0LNHPT (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:15:19 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211: Add notification for dropped Deauth/Disassoc From: Johannes Berg To: Jouni Malinen Cc: "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20101213220048.GA24752@jm.kir.nu> References: <20101213220048.GA24752@jm.kir.nu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:15:07 +0100 Message-ID: <1292310907.3569.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 00:00 +0200, Jouni Malinen wrote: > + * @NL80211_CMD_UNPROT_DEAUTHENTICATE: Unprotected deauthentication frame > + * notification. This event is used to indicate that an unprotected > + * deauthentication frame was dropped when MFP is in use. > + * @NL80211_CMD_UNPROT_DISASSOCIATE: Unprotected disassociation frame > + * notification. This event is used to indicate that an unprotected > + * disassociation frame was dropped when MFP is in use. > + * I don't mind, but if we add the frame body should we really have two commands? Or should we have just one? Are we likely to need similar functionality for other frames? The only ones I can think of are class 3 frames from unassociated stations, but that seems like it should be separate anyway. johannes