[PATCH v2 00/20] mesh support for wpa_supplicant

Bob Copeland me at bobcopeland.com
Fri Oct 24 09:19:41 EDT 2014


On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 01:22:49AM +0300, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> Figure 4-21 in IEEE Std 802.11-2012 shows an example of this.

Obviously I didn't look hard enough...

> There should certainly not be two copies of the same frame. That
> sequence of two Authentication frames from AP to STA looks quite strange
> in the context of Authentication (even if allowed for the SAE part). In
> addition, the following STA->AP Authentication frame and following
> Association Request STA->AP would look a bit strange. It looks more
> natural IEEE 802.11 authentication exchange when those frames are sent
> in similar order to older Authentication frame exchanges.. And anyway,
> this sequence shown here does not match Figure 4-21 (or the current
> hostapd/wpa_supplicant implementation for that matter).

Sure, makes sense.  That sequence I posted comes from Figure 11-4 in
802.11-2012, where AP has gone from Nothing -> Confirmed (due to "Com"
event) which does "1(0),2" i.e. send tr#1 + tr#2 as part of the
transition.  It looks like mesh case will be a bit different than
AP<->STA in any case, so I guess the question is, would it be best to:

 - modify the SAE state machine to do:

     if AP<->STA, transition to Committed on tr#1 reception
     without sending tr#2, and from Committed state to Accepted on
     tr#2 reception (sending tr#2).

 or,

 - keep previous implementation, and keep the mesh SAE SM separate
   (sharing whatever SAE code we can)

-- 
Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com


More information about the HostAP mailing list