[pkg-wpa-devel] wpasupplicant: option "wpa_iface" half works - but does IP config on the wpa_iface not the actual interface (normally a bridge)

[Paul Hedderly]

Kel Modderman wrote:
> I think this patch works, but modifies wpa_action in a way it is clearly not
> intended to be.
>
> When wpa_supplicant experiences a CONNECTED|DISCONNECTED event it executes
> an action script like: <script> <interface> <event>, and wpa_cli sets a few env
> variables at that time too.
>
> When <interface> is in a bridge do we always want to act on the bridge and not
> the interface? If this is always the case should wpa_supplicant supply the
> bridge interface name as argument when it is started with the bridge option?
> If not, we should make this somehow adjustable.
>
> One way would be to have WPA_BRIDGE variable set by wpa_cli at script execution
> time, as it does for WPA_ID and WPA_CTRL_DIR, rather than to rely on
> environment variables inherited from daemon start time. Otherwise, the script
> could check IF_WPA_BRIDGE before ignoring the arguments wpa_cli gave it and
> using IFACE environment variable that is set only at daemon start time.
>
> Thanks, Kel.
>   
You are right that my patch it is a totally brute force approach and
assumes that the wireless interface is the primary bridge interface - I 
submitted it only to demonstrate what I wanted to be able to do and show
that it is possible - I have actually changed most references to
WPA_IFACE to IFACE in the script for myself in the down and check subs.
But that is not a complete solution.

So yes having an interfaces variable like "wpa_control_bridge -" sounds
like a great idea.

One thing I think should be clear, is that if the wireless interface is
part of a bridge, it's own IP should never be set, and there should
never be any routes on it.

So if the wireless is part of a bridge (and setting "wpa_iface" gives
that expectation,) then wpa should either control IP/routes on the
bridge or do nothing with IP  at all. So perhaps the option should be
"wpa_ignore_ip -" having the default to do IP/route/dhcp setting on the
bridge, giving room for those who might be using their laptop as
effectively a roaming access point. (That would be a weird setup - using
an AP to control the SSID, and using a station to route traffic... :O)

Hmm second thought - it may be more logical to set "wpa_iface <blah>"
and "wpa_ip_iface <foO>" or "wpa_ip_iface none".

Anyway, my hack is making me very happy here - What I havent got round
to testing properly is if it will still work fine with a normal setup.
Oh hang it, I'll do a quick check now.... Yes - it all appears to work
just fine.

By the way - are we much closer to a fix for 373180
<mailto:373180 at bugs.debian.org>? When testing I keep forgetting to kill
wpa_supplicant and I wonder why nothing works...

--
Paul

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/attachments/20080326/9befdbc5/attachment-0002.htm