Why not aging the BSS in use?
Tue Apr 16 13:49:29 PDT 2013
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Mauger, MatthieuX
<matthieux.mauger at intel.com> wrote:
> We are currently facing a tricky problem, we are using a WiFi chip that is sometime not so reliable and we not always receive a deauth or beacon loss from the chip when leaving the range of a network.
> In such situation, we can trust that we are still connected even at kilometers from the BSS!
> As a workaround we are considering to use the aging mechanism in order to not keep such BSS in the scan list.
> However we saw in function "wpa_bss_update_end" in bss.c that the aging is voluntary not applied to the current BSS.
> We are wondering if is there a good reason to skip it? What could be the risk to apply aging on the BSS in use?
The code doesn't skip the aging in all cases, it ages the list based
on a new/fresh scan, hence the check.
If the scan results are old, it doesn't check for aging because it
might have already checked.
More information about the Hostap