Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:48332 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752653Ab2IFKLD (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2012 06:11:03 -0400 Message-ID: <1346926291.5469.6.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20120906_121107_344276_B1AC9BBB) Subject: Re: [RFC V2 2/2] cfg80211/nl80211: Enable drivers to implement mac address based ACL From: Johannes Berg To: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 12:11:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: <50487650.3050303@qca.qualcomm.com> References: <1346824110-26382-1-git-send-email-vthiagar@qca.qualcomm.com> <1346824110-26382-2-git-send-email-vthiagar@qca.qualcomm.com> <1346852578.4364.13.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <50487650.3050303@qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 15:39 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > > So about the race condition ... shouldn't the initial MAC list be given > > in the start_ap() call, so that the AP can start up with a proper ACL > > already in place, rather than starting up& then modifying later? > > Ok. So the ap will start with the initial mac list and the list > can also be changed dynamically?. I'm fine with this. Just throwing it out for consideration, it would seem safer to me I guess. Not that MAC ACLs are really a safety feature anyway, but ... johannes