Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 14:26:17 -0700 From: PseudoCylon <moonlightakkiy@yahoo.ca> To: Bernhard Schmidt <bschmidt@techwires.net> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org, freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/176201: [net80211] [patch] 11n station includes unrelated ht params into ASSOC_REQ packet Message-ID: <CAFZ_MY%2BpcGqB8U-%2B3RLiNtKEn19D8-a01akv4Vvwx4bPMNFMjQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201302222005.36490.bschmidt@techwires.net> References: <201302180246.r1I2kocv064092@freefall.freebsd.org> <CAJ-VmonXhBfxKMAD4EqhksqOKwVffQeE=JJ%2BR0qdifwAowcBkA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmonjWJoJ4CSRvtN7z3LYg=nEngcDnL49TZK96PngTkwRhg@mail.gmail.com> <201302222005.36490.bschmidt@techwires.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Bernhard Schmidt <bschmidt@techwires.net> wrote: > On Friday, February 22, 2013 07:52:47 PM Adrian Chadd wrote: >> Hm, it's possible in my sleep deprived state that I'm on the right but >> wrong track here. >> >> The OP problem is that we're not advertising the right capabilities >> when we associate, right? > > Correct. I didn't patch it right, but all of us agree on sta isn't sending correct param at association. With current code, sta sends back whatever it has received in probe resp packet. > >> Why aren't we just advertising the VAP ampdumax and ampdudensity no >> matter what the operating mode? Why are we capping those parameters to >> the learnt-from-AP parameters? > > Because the AP would otherwise deny the association request. Should ap only allow node which caps match ap's to associate? (By the way, can anyone point me to the code does denial? I couldn't find it.) AK
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFZ_MY%2BpcGqB8U-%2B3RLiNtKEn19D8-a01akv4Vvwx4bPMNFMjQ>