HostAP in the kernel ?

[Jean Tourrilhes]

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 05:31:52PM +0200, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:21:41PM -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> 
> > 	I would like to plan in advance to make sure we get the HostAP
> > driver integrated in kernel 2.6.X. We still have until this summer,
> > but I hate to do things last minute.
> 
> Yes, I agree with this completely. I think that the renamed files
> (hostap prefix in every file) was enough to make you happy with using
> linux/drivers/net/wireless. I have a patch for integrating the driver
> into 2.5.27 kernel and I will update it to the latest one.
> 
> I think that I will also take couple of configuration items (like
> hostapd support and possibly firmware download support) from
> hostap_config.h and add them to kernel configuration. In addition,
> hostapd and all user space tools could be separated to a separate
> package for those using kernel version of the driver.

	I'll act as facilitator, but I will never push it myself,
because once it's in the kernel it need to be kept up to date.

> > 	o crypto : the kernel just included a new crypto API. Maybe
> > you may want to hook host-wep to it, that would be an easier sell.
> 
> Current kernel crypto implementation does not seem to support RC4, so it
> might not be best possible solutions at least yet. CRC32 code is
> probably already in kernel, so that could be used. However, current WEP
> code in Host AP driver interleaves RC4 and CRC32 operations can goes
> through the payload in one pass. I would rather not change this unless
> the new version is performing at least as well as the implementation in
> the driver. Anyway, hostap_crypt_wep.c is not really that large a piece
> of code..

	As long as you have a rock solid excuse to present to Jeff,
that's perfect. I want to make sure we cover all those stupid
questions.

> As far as supporting other encryption algorithms, crypto API might be
> good starting point. However, I would still like to be able to support
> 2.2 and 2.4 kernel versions, so there might be alternative
> implementations. Modular encryption support in the current driver should
> make this relatively easy, so this should be OK.

	No problem.

> > 	On the Wireless Extension side, I believe that everything we
> > discussed has been included. I'm planning to work on WE-16 (mostly
> > reworking iwspy support), so if you need an extra feature, tell me
> > about it.
> 
> I think that wireless extensions situation is quite good now. I don't
> think I have any new requirements for that at the moment, but I would
> probably need to go through the driver code at some point and take a
> closer look at this.

	Ok.

> Jouni Malinen

	Have fun...

	Jean