<P>
Hi Jouni,<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for knowing this.Good work done.<BR>
<BR>
Regards<BR>
Ambedkar.R<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 Jouni Malinen wrote :<BR>
>I converted the submitted patches from Atheros, Intel, and Metalink into<BR>
>form that shows what exactly is changed in hostapd and wpa_supplicant to<BR>
>make it easier to review the different designs. These patches are<BR>
>available at http://w1.fi/contrib/wps-patches/<BR>
><BR>
>The Intel patches (hostapd-0.4.8-intel.patch and<BR>
>wpa_supplicant-0.4.8-intel.patch) are against the 0.4.8. The<BR>
>Metalink patches (hostapd-0.4.10-intel-metalink.patch and<BR>
>wpa_supplicant-0.4.10-intel-metalink.patch) are based on the Intel<BR>
>version, but are against 0.4.10 (I combined the submitted patches and<BR>
>re-diffed them against the 0.4.10 releases). Atheros patches<BR>
>(hostapd-wps-atheros.patch and wpa_supplicant-wps-atheros.patch) are<BR>
>against the 0.6.x branch in the git tree.<BR>
><BR>
>The Intel patches are mainly included for reference. In practice, I'm<BR>
>planning on only reviewing Metalink and Atheros patches since the<BR>
>Metalink version includes all the Intel changes and additional<BR>
>functionality and fixes.<BR>
><BR>
>Based on a quick browse through the patches, I would note couple of<BR>
>differences in the patches. Metalink versions are against an old, stable<BR>
>branch (0.4.x) while Atheros patches are against the current development<BR>
>tree (0.6.x). In practice, the changes will need to go to the<BR>
>development tree, so any changes against 0.4.x will need to be updated<BR>
>before they can be merged.<BR>
><BR>
>As far as the hostapd changes are concerned, both Atheros and Metalink<BR>
>versions are based on the Intel WSC reference code and both are using an<BR>
>external program, Intel wsc daemon, to process the EAP-WSC messages.<BR>
><BR>
>wpa_supplicant changes are using different approach. Metalink patch is<BR>
>based on the Intel WSC reference changes and is using the Intel wsc<BR>
>daemon to process the EAP-WSC messages. Atheros version is adding a new<BR>
>implementation for EAP-WSC processing for an WPA enrollee and it does<BR>
>not use the Intel wsc daemon.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>Couple of generic comments that apply to all versions:<BR>
><BR>
>The coding style will need to be cleaned up to match with the one used<BR>
>in hostapd/wpa_supplicant for any changes that would be included in<BR>
>either of these programs. If needed, I will do this when applying<BR>
>changes to my git tree. This will produce relatively large number of<BR>
>whitespace changes which should be kept in mind since other patches will<BR>
>most likely not apply after this type of cleanup.<BR>
><BR>
>There were number of #ifdef EAP_WSC/EAP_WPS blocks in generic code<BR>
>(e.g., eap.c or eapol_sm.c) that changed behavior depending on whether<BR>
>WPS was included in the build or not. If these changes would cause<BR>
>different behavior when WPS is disabled at runtime, they will not be<BR>
>acceptable and will need to be modified to use runtime information<BR>
>(i.e., whether WPS was enabled or not) to determine what should be done.<BR>
>In other words, just enabling WPS in the build, but not enabling it in<BR>
>the runtime configuration should not change behavior.<BR>
><BR>
>--<BR>
>Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA<BR>
>_______________________________________________<BR>
>HostAP mailing list<BR>
>HostAP@shmoo.com<BR>
>http://lists.shmoo.com/mailman/listinfo/hostap<BR>
</P>
<br><br>