Disable AP functionality per interface?

Blanquicet-Melendez Jose (MM) jose.blanquicet-melendez at magnetimarelli.com
Mon Jul 4 00:22:22 PDT 2016


A use case would be the following, when there is a single chipset that exposes multiple virtual interfaces, for example one for STA, another one for AP and one more for P2P (Capable of concurrent connections); the wpa_supplicant will expose for each interface all the chipset capabilities (STA, AP and P2P), which make impossible for the higher layers to distinguish them.

By using p2p_disabled=1 on the configuration file of the STA and AP interfaces, the wpa_supplicant will not report P2P capabilities for those two interfaces and just for P2P interface, which is perfect. That's the reason it would be really useful to have such functionality for AP. In that way, it would be possible to use the wpa_supplicant's configuration file to set exactly which of the interfaces will be used for P2P and AP role.

I think this should be done at wpa_supplicant level and not in the higher layers. What do you think?

Best regards,

Jose Blanquicet

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jouni Malinen [mailto:j at w1.fi]
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 7:57 PM
> To: Blanquicet-Melendez Jose (MM)
> Cc: hostap at lists.infradead.org; MANIEZZO Marco (MM)
> Subject: Re: Disable AP functionality per interface?
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 09:42:39AM +0000, Blanquicet-Melendez Jose (MM)
> wrote:
> > In 7a808c7eb70e213164f250645ef65231fc8a1590 was added a patch to allow
> P2P functionality to be disabled per interface. Then
> f91e11f465caf14126a3528dc2edceed963c2993 complemented it by avoiding
> to report p2p capabilities for the interface where p2p was disabled.
> >
> > Does exist the same feature to AP? Does there exist a procedure to
> disabled AP functionality per interface and avoid to report it as a capability?
> There is no such functionality. What would be the use case for this? For P2P,
> there are actually changes in behavior while disabling AP capability would not
> result in any difference that I can see apart from rejecting some commands.
> In other words, I'd rather do this at higher layer (i.e., do not issue those
> commands to wpa_supplicant).
> --
> Jouni Malinen                                            PGP id EFC895FA



Confidential Notice: This message - including its attachments - may contain proprietary, confidential and/or legally protected information and is intended solely for the use of the designated addressee(s) above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any downloading, copying, disclosure, distribution or use of the contents of the above information is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication by mistake, please forward the message back to the sender at the email address above, delete the message from all mailboxes and any other electronic storage medium and destroy all copies.
Disclaimer Notice: Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be safe or error-free. Therefore we do not assure that this message is complete or accurate and we do not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message.

More information about the Hostap mailing list