[pkg-wpa-devel] Bug#474579: Bug#474579: wpasupplicant: wpa interface extensions incompatible with wireless-tools interface extensions

[Kel Modderman]

On Monday 07 April 2008 02:13:39 Chadinater wrote:
> Subject: wpasupplicant: wpa interface extensions incompatible with wireless-tools interface extensions
> Package: wpasupplicant
> Version: 0.6.3-1
> Severity: normal
> 
> Many upgrades ago, I discovered that calling wpa_supplicant either
> manually or using the wpa-* extensions in an /etc/network/interfaces
> stanza fails to connect my madwifi card to my madwifi wpa-eap hostapd+
> freeradius access point.
> 
> The problem relates to the presence of wireless_* interfaces extensions
> from the wireless-tool package.  In particular, extensions that 
> explicitedly identify my ap; namely, wireless_channel, wireless_essid
> wireless_ap.  
> 
> For example, this stanza will not connect me to my ap.
> iface ath0 inet dhcp
>    wireless_mode Managed
>    wireless_channel 1
>    wireless_essid home_wpa
>    wireless_ap 0d:0f:cb:b1:bd:eb
>    wpa-driver madwifi
>    wpa_conf /etc/wpa_wpasupplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf
> 
> If I disable all wireless-* lines, I can connect.
> 
> Additionally, this stanza and process works...
> iface ath0 inet dhcp
>    wireless_mode Managed
>    wireless_ap any
> 
> If I issue the following commands, in this order, I can
> get the connection.
> 1) ifup ath0
> 2) iwconfig ath0 ap 0d:0f:cb:b1:bd:eb ap home_wpa
> 3) /sbin/wpa_supplicant -D madwifi -i ath0 -c
> /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant
> 
> So wpa_supplicant and wireless tools (iwconfig, etc) are
> compatible outside of interface stanza, but not in a stanza.
> Why would they be mutually exclusively inside a stanza, but
> not outside.

The ifupdown wireless-tools hook may be executed after wpasupplicant hook,
thus executing them in an order you don't like or expect.

> 
> Debian's wpa_supplicant's documentation does not mention 
> this incompatiblity, although it seems to be implied.  Maybe
> the documentation should make it more explicit?  Or maybe
> wireless-* extensions and wpa-* extensions should get along
> because the intention of both is to identify and connect to
> an access point?

The Linux wireless gods seem to think that wireless-extensions was poorly
designed, don't want to fix it up, and persue a new line of development.

I'm not sure this package can change anything here, it seems this is more a
complaint than a bug report. What do you want wpasupplicant package to do?

Thanks, Kel.