[PATCH 0/7] P2PS fixes based on http://w1.fi/p/p2ps-pending/
Sun Aug 9 07:39:14 PDT 2015
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hostap-bounces at lists.shmoo.com [mailto:hostap-
> bounces at lists.shmoo.com] On Behalf Of Jouni Malinen
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 21:18
> To: hostap at lists.shmoo.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] P2PS fixes based on http://w1.fi/p/p2ps-pending/
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 08:59:59AM +0300, Ilan Peer wrote:
> > The only fix for this was in "Fix PD PIN event notifications" patch.
> > Tested this series on hwsim (with and without VMs) using the latest
> > mac80211-next tree.
> Thanks, partially applied with some changes.
> > Andrei Otcheretianski (5):
> > tests: Use p2ps_provision() and p2ps_connect_pd() in
> > p2ps_connect_p2ps_method()
> > tests: Clear scan cache on reset
> > tests: Few trivial fixes to p2ps tests
> I dropped these two since I don't want to add the latency and extra command
> between every single test case when only a small minority of test cases
> depending on this. If you can identify test case sequences where you see
> issues with old scan results, the affected test cases can be addressed on case
> by case basis.
> > tests: Re-factor PD and connection flows in p2ps tests
> > P2PS: Authorize any peer for p2ps method
> I agree with the P2P Device Address being incorrect in the earlier
> implementation, but I don't see why authorizing any peer would be a good
> resolution for it. I modified this patch to fix the address selection, i.e., use P2P
> Interface Address, not P2P Device Address and only if the intended interface
> address is not available, authorize any address. That said, I don't really like that
> either, but I wanted to get this patch in to get this set finally through. I think it
> would be good to try to see if the intended interface address can be made
> available in more cases and if not, add code to make WPS Registrar reject
> peer based on P2P Device Address in cases where any interface address had
> to be authorized.
Using the intended P2P interface address exchanged in the P2PS PD for deducting the P2P Client interface address might be wrong, as from our interpretation of the spec, the P2P Interface address attribute is intend to convey the address of the P2P GO and not that of the P2P Client. In addition, it is possible that the P2P interface address exchanged in the PD signaling would not be used once the P2PS PD is done. For example, in the case that one of the devices publishes support for (Cli, GO) and adds the address of a currently running P2P GO, it is possible that at the end of the PD signaling it would instantiate another P2P Client, in which case a new P2P interface address would be used.
> > Max Stepanov (2):
> > P2PS: Fix PD PIN event notifications
> > tests: Add P2PS PD feature capability CPT tests
More information about the Hostap