[PATCH] Set default P2P_MAX_CLIENT_IDLE to 20

[Jithu Jance]

Hi Jouni,

> Do you know what is causing the authentication to take more than 10
> seconds? That sounds pretty excessive for P2P use cases..

Suppose the association fails due to timeout [Auth/Assoc frame is sent but
received no response], then I see that Authentication timeout happens only
after 10secs. So the assoc retry happens only after 10 secs in this case.By
this time, the group_idle_timeout would expire and the group is removed.

The reason for no auth resp/assoc resp could be due to absence of peer (due
to a scan on the shared virtual interface) at that point of time. So I feel
reducing the authentication timeout to 5secs would give a chance to try
Assoc one more time.

Pls correct me, If my understanding is wrong.





- Jithu Jance
*
*


On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 11:17 PM, Jouni Malinen <j at w1.fi> wrote:

> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 05:16:33AM +0000, Jithu Jance wrote:
> > Consider the disconnect event generated due to EAP-FAILURE(after WPS
> handshake) during the P2P connection.
> >
> > In this disconnect context, the group idle timer will be set to 10 and
> assoc retry starts. If the connection doesn't go through in
> > the first attempt the group will be removed. This is because the
> authentication timeout happens at 10secs and the assoc
> > will be retried only after that.
>
> Do you know what is causing the authentication to take more than 10
> seconds? That sounds pretty excessive for P2P use cases..
>
> > I feel setting to twenty seconds will help to retry at least two times.
> Please see whether it is okay.
>
> This is somewhat problematic since there is also the opposite
> requirement of making the device notice quickly when the group goes down
> and the explicit indication from GO using Deauthentication frame is not
> that reliable (or correctly implemented in many deployed devices for
> that matter).
>
> > Setting authentication timeout to 5secs is also another option. But not
> sure whether there are some systems requiring 10secs
> > time.
>
> That could be reasonable for P2P use cases. Though, I would rather
> figure out whether there would be better signals for determining that a
> new attempt is needed. That authentication timeout should really be more
> specific to cases where EAPOL frames do not get processed in reasonable
> time frame. I would assume that the case you are thinking of here would
> be something else. Or are you really seeing cases where association is
> completed successfully, but 4-way handshake does not go through?
>
> --
> Jouni Malinen                                            PGP id EFC895FA
> _______________________________________________
> HostAP mailing list
> HostAP at lists.shmoo.com
> http://lists.shmoo.com/mailman/listinfo/hostap
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.shmoo.com/pipermail/hostap/attachments/20120614/6f6e2b98/attachment.htm