Subject: Re: ural patch
To: None <current-users@NetBSD.org, tech-kern@NetBSD.org>
From: David Young <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 07/07/2006 02:52:33
On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 04:11:57PM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote:
> Matthias Drochner wrote:
> > email@example.com said:
> >> Matthias has tested ural on i386. He said, "I'm quite happy with the
> >> ural driver now."
> > Yes, it is the first time that the driver is really usable for me.
> > There are some minor problems still as there are the wrong
> > rxrate reporting to "radiotap" bpf listeners, and there are
> > problems with monitor mode as Sam Leffler wrote in another mail.
> > For now, I'd suggest to comment out the rxrate reporting as
> > this just creates misleading information.
> Yes, I've got several monitor mode fixes for ural/ral. I also recently
> circulated packet injection changes for comment to freebsd users; if
> anyone is interested take a look at
> There's a kernel patch that should port over easily and a bunch of tools
> that are mostly from Andrea Bittau.
Please, use a different DLT than radiotap's (DLT_IEEE802_11_RADIO)
to inject non-radiotap headers.
When I made a similar patch for a customer, I added to bpf a bpfattach3()
call that sets a new bpf_if member, bif_output, to ieee80211_output().
I made ieee80211_output() grok both AF_UNSPEC and pseudo_AF_HDRCMPLT,
which is sometimes handy. I probably cannot open-source the patches
any time soon, *sigh*.
David Young OJC Technologies
firstname.lastname@example.org Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933