Re: R: [RFC] Wi-Fi Protected Setup (WPS) connection

Hi Marco, > Thank you very much for your feedback. For this proposal we based > on this assumption: we are talking about DBUS interfaces, these are > not directly the interface the end user will need to understand, in > between there must be and application for shell/graphical UI => > here the developer may not be a WiFi expert, so we put all the > parameters of StartWPS and CancelWPS optional (except > authentication), and connman will try to figure out an automatic > behavior => this already goes in the direction you proposed >   > On the other hand the automatic behavior may not suit all cases and > an expert developer may know how to manage several WiFi interfaces > (in our case three, STA, P2P and AP) => in this case the optional > parameters can come in handy. >   > “Ifname" : optional, meaning it can be empty, but with it we don’t > need other methods when the UI needs to choose between STA-WPS or > AP-WPS, or there is a P2P interface that can be used also as an > alternative STA or AP with WPS   Still, ConnMan never uses ifnames as an entry point for a decision. Actually, the only place where you will see an interface name is in the description of a Service entry (Ethernet dict attribute). This is enforced, you can't change that rule :) we don't want users or UI code to mess up with interfaces directly. Make it work for 1 device first.  For P2P, you could use an alternate method called "Pair()" maybe. The role is decided during pairing anyway (if I remember well? this is so far away...). Let's see how to solve that for 2+ device later. (devices could be ordered by their support: the device which supports more technologies would be the first, etc... ConnMan would loop on them, each time StartWPS() - or Pair if supported - failed. Just a quick idea.)

> "Type" and "Pin" you are proposing to have only one parameter > “authentication” but when the device with connman is enrollee it > must show a PIN to the user, not receive one: then we need to have > two parameters (Type, PIN)   We never supported the registrar side on current WPS support in ConnMan (as far as I remember at least). So if the Agent is requesting about WPS, up to the UI to provide a PIN the user would use if user wants to use PIN method.

> like we propose, or if you prefer only one (Authentication) it must > be parsed in the following way: > -          A string like “PIN” which means the connman must provide > a PIN to the GUI so that the user can enter it in the other device > (normally the AP) > -          A string containing a number like “12345678” which means > this is the PIN to be used > -          Empty: means use PBC

> “role” – optional, meaning it can be empty, but while for the STA I > agree with you it mostly is an enrollee, the AP is a more > complicated system; why not offer the possibility to the developer > to choose the role if he wants (or if he needs)?   AP mode in ConnMan is a very simplistic one. Actually, wpa_s does not provide much feature there as well (compared to hostapd). You could stick with registrar and that's it. If you want to differentiate, you could add a configuration entry in main.conf (like APWPSMode=<registrar/enrollee> ? registrar would be default) Less stuff to expose through DBus at least.  I would be surprised people really care about such option anyway.

Hope it clarifies things.