o11s: Modularize Path Selection Protocol etc.
Hi mesh folks!
For my diploma thesis, I want to add a P2P routing protocoll to the pre-80211s software in the linux kernel. For details, see my previous mails. [1],[2]
In struct ieee80211_if_mesh, the current code reads
net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.h
Quoted 4 lines
u8 mesh_id[IEEE80211_MAX_MESH_ID_LEN];
size_t mesh_id_len;
/* Active Path Selection Protocol Identifier */
u8 mesh_pp_id;Quoted 8 lines
/* Active Path Selection Metric Identifier */
u8 mesh_pm_id;
/* Congestion Control Mode Identifier */
u8 mesh_cc_id;
/* Synchronization Protocol Identifier */
u8 mesh_sp_id;
/* Authentication Protocol Identifier */
u8 mesh_auth_id;which is what I at first wanted to work with.
In my last patch [2], I introduced some new 32 bit struct members, because, if I am not mistaken, these IDs should include a vendor specific OUI, which enables a user to combine a path selection protocol of vendor A with a path selection metric of vendor B.
So.. am I erring here?
If yes, I would introduce a new 24 bit value for the OUI, which will be combined with all the above u8's before going over the wire (into the air of course)
...if no, I would replace those values by 32 bit ones, possibly even braking ABI compatibility.
What do you think?
Do you maybe have a better suggestion?
Thank you very much for your input!
Florian
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=122600107811517&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=123300309207545&w=2
Quoted 22 lines · Florian Sesser
Hi mesh folks!
For my diploma thesis, I want to add a P2P routing protocoll to the pre-80211s software in the linux kernel. For details, see my previous mails. [1],[2]
In struct
ieee80211_if_mesh, the current code reads
net/mac80211/ieee80211_i.hQuoted 4 lines
u8 mesh_id[IEEE80211_MAX_MESH_ID_LEN]; size_t mesh_id_len; /* Active Path Selection Protocol Identifier */ u8 mesh_pp_id;Quoted 8 lines
/* Active Path Selection Metric Identifier */ u8 mesh_pm_id; /* Congestion Control Mode Identifier */ u8 mesh_cc_id; /* Synchronization Protocol Identifier */ u8 mesh_sp_id; /* Authentication Protocol Identifier */ u8 mesh_auth_id;
Quoted 6 lines
which is what I at first wanted to work with.
In my last patch [2], I introduced some new 32 bit struct members, because, if I am not mistaken, these IDs should include a vendor specific OUI, which enables a user to combine a path selection protocol of vendor A with a path selection metric of vendor B.
This has changed quite a bit on the latest 802.11s draft standards. If you want to use your own routing protocol and to be 802.11s compliant, you need to set the path selection protocol ID to 255 and append a vendor specific information element to the management frame.
Quoted 17 lines
So.. am I erring here?
If yes, I would introduce a new 24 bit value for the OUI, which will be combined with all the above u8's before going over the wire (into the air of course)
...if no, I would replace those values by 32 bit ones, possibly even braking ABI compatibility.What do you think?
Do you maybe have a better suggestion?Thank you very much for your input!
Florian
Quoted 8 lines
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=122600107811517&w=2
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=123300309207545&w=2--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Rui Paulo
Am Montag, 21. Dezember 2009 17:17:29 schrieb Rui Paulo:
Quoted 1 line
This has changed quite a bit on the latest 802.11s draft standards. If you want to use your own routing protocol and to be 802.11s compliant, you need to set the path selection protocol ID to 255 and append a vendor specific information element to the management frame.
Great, so this changed again.
Is there a legal way to obtain Draft 4.0 without being a member of the 802.11 TGs? I have full access to the IEEE standards library via my university, but only Draft 3.0 has been published so far.
Signature · 5 lines
mit freundlichen Grüßen/regards Simon Raffeiner University of Applied Sciences Offenburg, Germany Department of Computer Science, RoboCup Team
Hi Rui!
Thanks for your prompt reply. I will dig into the new draft ASAP.
(It is propably rude to ask for an up to date draft on this list? I would, of course, discreetly profit from having it handy shortly...)
Greetings!
Florian
Me:
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
[...]
In my last patch [2], I introduced some new 32 bit struct members, because, if I am not mistaken, these IDs should include a vendor specific OUI, which enables a user to combine a path selection protocol of vendor A with a path selection metric of vendor B.
Rui:
Quoted 6 lines
This has changed quite a bit on the latest 802.11s draft standards. If you want to use your own routing protocol and to be 802.11s compliant, you need to set the path selection protocol ID to 255 and append a vendor specific information element to the management frame. [...]
Rui Paulo