HostAP Digest, Vol 6, Issue 24
Ged Haywood
ged
Tue Oct 14 08:10:06 PDT 2003
Hi there,
http://www.sindominio.net/pipermail/madridwireless/2002-June/003594.html
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 hostap-request at shmoo.com wrote:
> Send HostAP mailing list submissions to
> hostap at shmoo.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.shmoo.com/mailman/listinfo/hostap
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> hostap-request at shmoo.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> hostap-owner at shmoo.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of HostAP digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Management frames problem in 0.0.4 and later (Petr Novak)
> 2. Management frames problem in 0.0.4 and later (Petr Novak)
> 3. Increasing intersil prism2+ based card power (Valdemaras Pipiras)
> 4. Re: problem with management frames (0.0.4 and later)
> (Jouni Malinen)
> 5. Re: Management frames problem in 0.0.4 and later (Jouni Malinen)
> 6. PocketPC 2003 & 802.1X/EAP-TLS with Hostapd & Freeradius
> 0.9.1 fa ils (Obermeier Markus ICM MP P S 2)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:00:21 +0100
> From: "Petr Novak" <pen at dobnet.cz>
> Subject: Management frames problem in 0.0.4 and later
> To: hostap at shmoo.com
> Message-ID: <20031013205543.M76256 at dobnet.cz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
>
> Dear Joini and all others,
>
> some time I have posted a problem with management frames (authentication) in
> 0.0.4 and later version (it was late September and it referred to current
> CVS). I was told to narrow it to before/after 0.0.4 which I did and to sniff
> the actual communication, which I have posted a week ago. However, I have not
> received any further information. Is someone (Jouni?) looking into the
> problem, or I am completely left to my own? I would appreciate some
> acknowledgement that someone is prepared to look at the problem.
>
> I can try to localize the problem further, but I might need some more
> guidance. If everything else fails, I will try the hostap changes one by one
> between 0.0.3 and 0.0.4 to find which one is the root cause of the problem.
>
> Is there anything visible in the sniff which I have posted?
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> --
> Petr Novak
> pen at dobnet.cz
> +420 776 204 526
> +420 603 870 101
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 23:00:26 +0100
> From: "Petr Novak" <pen at dobnet.cz>
> Subject: Management frames problem in 0.0.4 and later
> To: hostap at shmoo.com
> Message-ID: <20031013210026.M369 at dobnet.cz>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
>
> Dear Jouni and all others,
>
> some time I have posted a problem with management frames (authentication) in
> 0.0.4 and later version (it was late September and it referred to current
> CVS). I was told to narrow it to before/after 0.0.4 which I did and to sniff
> the actual communication, which I have posted a week ago. However, I have not
> received any further information. Is someone (Jouni?) looking into the
> problem, or I am completely left to my own? I would appreciate some
> acknowledgement that someone is prepared to look at the problem.
>
> I can try to localize the problem further, but I might need some more
> guidance. If everything else fails, I will try the hostap changes one by one
> between 0.0.3 and 0.0.4 to find which one is the root cause of the problem.
>
> Is there anything visible in the sniff which I have posted?
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> --
> Petr Novak
> pen at dobnet.cz
> +420 776 204 526
> +420 603 870 101
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 13:03:42 +0300
> From: "Valdemaras Pipiras" <varas at nora.lzua.lt>
> Subject: Increasing intersil prism2+ based card power
> To: hostap at shmoo.com
> Message-ID: <3F8AA2AF.2639.107602D at localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I found quite interesting article : http://www.nodomainname.co.uk/ma401/ma401.htm
> In the end of this article it's written:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Although as yet untested, reference to the following Intersil document
> http://www.intersil.com/data/fn/fn4/fn4856/fn4856.pdf
> shows that CR31 controls the transmit power which is by default at 0xF0. Setting this
> to 0x80 (these values are in hex, just
> use 80 in the software!) should set the power to 100mW instead of the default 30mW.
> The tool to do this is at http://www.intersil.com/design/prism/software-
> o/PrismTestUtil322.exe.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Unfortunately all these links are dead:(
>
> Thanks to google, I found Jouni Malinen post (http://hostap.epitest.fi/hostap/2002-
> 03/0300.html):
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 'writemif' can be used with following command: 'iwpriv wlan0 writemif <CR*2> <value
> to be written>' (e.g., 'iwpriv wlan0
> writemif 26 17' sets bits 4 (SleepIQ) and 0 (Enable test mode commands) of CR13.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Does it mean that 'iwpriv wlanX writemif' configures registers, and it's no need of this
> windows program? However it's need of fn4856.pdf document, so have somebody
> downloaded this doc earlear, maybe you could share it with me?
>
> Is it possible to increase power of Intersil Prism2x card using this way?
>
> Valdemaras Pipiras
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://sisyphus.iocaine.com/pipermail/hostap/attachments/20031013/5b6622e1/attachment-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:23:39 -0700
> From: Jouni Malinen <jkmaline at cc.hut.fi>
> Subject: Re: problem with management frames (0.0.4 and later)
> To: hostap at shmoo.com
> Message-ID: <20031014012338.GA3962 at jm.kir.nu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 12:14:20PM +0100, Petr Novak wrote:
>
> > sorry for the delay, this is a dump of the problem announced last week with
> > recent CVS versions of hostAP while handling association/authentication. It
> > works 100% in 0.0.3 and works really bad in 0.0.4 and later. All firmware is
> > STA1.7.4, all stations are hostAP same version. The sniffed WLAN is wlan2,
> > MAC addr replaced by AP:AP:AP:AP:AP, station MAC mapped to STA0x:STA0x:STA0x.
>
> Did you happen to iwconfig txpower in the AP or STAs? It was removed in
> 0.0.4. If you did not configure TX power explicitly with iwconfig, this
> should not have changed anything, though.
>
> If I remember correctly, all your STAs were quite long way away from the
> AP. Have you tested the AP with another STA that would be close to the
> AP?
>
> > Let's start with a good sniff and syslog, 0.0.3:
>
> OK, that sniff log was good for reference numbers. STA04 managed to
> authenticate and associate without any problems. STA03 had some issues;
> maybe due to dropped frames. Sniffer was clearly unable to receive all
> frames.
>
> > and now the bad one:
> >
> > Oct 4 12:44:39 dobgw kernel: wlan2: STA04:STA04:STA04 auth_cb - frame was
> > not ACKed
>
> Unfortunately, this sniffer log did not include the most interesting
> information for me, i.e., the time used between the authentication frame
> from STA and the reply from AP. It would be useful to see these frames
> (i.e., auth transaction #1 and #2 and all ACKs related to them) in one
> sniffer log. Some STA implementations seem to not ACK authentication
> frame from the AP if it takes too long time to receive that after STA's
> own authentication frame was sent.
>
> The frame exchanges in this sniffer log looked somewhat odd.. The AP
> seemed to be able to receive all management frames from the STA (since
> it ACKed them), but it did not seem to receive ACK/CTS frames from the
> STA (since it retried sending the original data/RTS frame). This is
> quite low-level issue and the driver does not really have much control
> about retries/ACKs.
>
> I don't remember changes anything that should cause something like this
> between 0.0.3 and 0.0.4, but then again, quite a bit of code changed
> between those versions. You could at least verify that the BBP and MAC
> configuration is same by comparing "utils/hostap_diag -a wlan#" output
> from the same card running 0.0.3 and 0.0.4 version of the driver.
>
>
More information about the Hostap
mailing list