Find attached the patch that creates a new driver: roboswitch. This
driver adds support for wired authentication with a Broadcom
RoboSwitch chipset. For example it is now possible to do wired
authentication with a Linksys WRT54G router running OpenWRT.
LIMITATIONS
- At the moment the driver does not support the BCM5365 series (though
adding it requires just some register tweaks).
- The driver is also limited to Linux (this is a far more technical
restriction).
- In order to compile against a 2.4 series you need to edit
include/linux/mii.h and change all references to "u16" in "__u16". I
have submitted a patch upstream that will fix this in a future version
of the 2.4 kernel. [These modifications (and more) are now included in
the kernel source and can be found in versions 2.4.37-rc2 and up.]
USAGE
- Usage is similar to the wired driver. Choose the interfacename of
the vlan that contains your desired authentication port on the router.
This name must be formatted as <interface>.<vlan>, which is the
default on all systems I know.
Documentation appeared a little vague about which options are global and
which are tied to a particular interface. This leads to confusion when
using certain combinations of options, e.g. the command "wpa_supplicant
-c /etc/wpa_supplican.conf -u" will not do what is intuitively expected
from it - it will not read the config file given with -c option because
no -i option was given. This command is still valid because -u option is
used. The wpa_supplicant running like this will also not listen on any
control socket, because the socket file name is usually given in the
config file. This command line also happens to be the default in Fedora 9.
This patch does not try to change any behaviour, but rather document
these nuances clearly.
Explain that wpa_supplicant supports a variety of drivers, but only a
subset of them are chosen at compile time.
Signed-off-by: Kel Modderman <kel@otaku42.de>
The Debian package checker "lintian" was making noise about
wpa_supplicant.conf(5). It was caused by a line beginning with ', which is
apparently not liked by man(1).
I suggest the use of <emphasis>word</emphasis> where 'word' is used at the
moment.
Signed-off-by: Kel Modderman <kel@otaku42.de>
