Reinhard Tartler @ 2006-03-09 (Thursday), 21:47 (+0100) > Hi, Guten abend,
> wpasupplicant. We have had this week some discussion about the future of > wpasupplicant, and how it should be started. I've read the README.modes and the threads referenced to in the previous message. As the initial post to this bug report suggests, I use wpasupplicant primarly as a replacement for waproamd and I strongly believe that a laptop should be able to roam between networks with minimal manual interaction. > To be honest, I don't really get why you want to use wpasupplicant in > the way you describe it in your bugreport. The suggested roaming solution could work with simple configurations, but I fail to see it working for the more complex ones. My real world use scenarios include networks without dhcp servers, networks that requires logging in using an http interface and even one where a vpn tunnel needs to be started for any internet access to be available. These are not ideal environments, but they are all existing in my reality and outside of my control to change. By using the "up" command in /etc/network/interfaces, almost any weird setup can be done and that's what I do now. It is a bit trickier to do that when the interface goes up only once, instead of on every time it receives a reliable layer two link. Instead of using wpa_cli with action scripts, similar functionality can probably be archived using other software. I realize that, but only as long as /e/n/i only covers layer three initialization. Please let me know if I'm missing anything trivial before I troll away. -- /Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
