Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Nov 2012 22:53:47 +0100
From:      Martin <nakal@web.de>
To:        Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: kern/149516: [ath] ath(4) hostap with fake MAC/BSSID results in station dropping packets when associated
Message-ID:  <20121129225347.757b1fc8@zelda.sugioarto.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=y0PKWXHoxJUXnj%2BV%2B=%2BEBZa5B8F0rY_1_ZU7nxgxMrg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201211291940.qATJe1Jf033574@freefall.freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmo=0kvPO=ioieDeaciX2E-37RUt756qMA07W7NyoDSPzKQ@mail.gmail.com> <20121129214512.4909fa8f@zelda.sugioarto.com> <CAJ-Vmokc=RZJyR_KCCpqxwBQyphc7VdAT5RBduF=g8pi_F0BEQ@mail.gmail.com> <20121129223901.686290ce@zelda.sugioarto.com> <CAJ-Vmo=y0PKWXHoxJUXnj%2BV%2B=%2BEBZa5B8F0rY_1_ZU7nxgxMrg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am Thu, 29 Nov 2012 13:43:04 -0800
schrieb Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>:

> There was someone who posted on -wireless a while ago about how to
> "correctly" program different mac addresses for different VAPs. The
> whole setup path is a little un-intuitive and needs some love.
> 
> So take a look over the -wireless archives for multi-VAP and separate
> mac addresses. :-)
> 
> Aha. It's actually having the LSB set in the first octet. Not the MSB.
> 
> So 0x80 is fine. 0x90 is fine. 0x09 is not.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast_address
> 
> The hardware treats that address as special, so don't ever configure a
> MAC with that multicast bit set. Or things won't work out well.
> 
> 
> 
> Adrian


When I understand you correctly, this only explains why 0x0d does not
work. It still does not explain why 0x00 and 0xd0 do not work. I also
wrote that the lowest bit needs to be "0" in my first PR (duh! it has
been too long ago!). [1]

As I said, everything was OK on FreeBSD 7.x and broke somewhere in
8.1-RELEASE. Please also notice that the problem affects ath(4) on the
driver layer (I suppose) not generally on IEEE 802.11 layer, because I
also tested with rum(4) and I could use it properly.

[1]
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2010-July/058059.html

--
Martin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20121129225347.757b1fc8>