Add Management frame to ieee80211 module

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. try to have managenent frame (becon )
2.
3.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
I suggest to add Manaagement frame in to ieee80211( Probe Request,Probe 
Response, Beacon,Disassociate)

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
Linux version 2.6.32-24-generic (buildd@palmer) (gcc version 4.4.3 (Ubuntu 
4.4.3-4ubuntu5, Python 2.6.5

Please provide any additional information below.
So I did a patch to do that

Original issue reported on code.google.com by sylvain....@gmail.com on 13 Sep 2010 at 8:38

Attachments:

• ieee80211_py.diff

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I attached a patch that supports management frames, as well as few other types. 
It also has test cases to check the code.

Original comment by timur.al...@gmail.com on 29 Sep 2010 at 6:26

Attachments:

• ieee80211.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

 Dear timur alperovich,
 I add nformation elements to your patch. we could talk about the field names that I add. If you want?

Regards,
Sylvain  

Original comment by sylvain....@gmail.com on 12 Oct 2010 at 6:43

Attachments:

• ieee80211.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi Sylvain,

I'm a little bit confused because it looks like the latest patch you added was 
a diff against dpkt with your previous patch applied?

I agree that it makes sense to have specific IE names, etc, because right now, 
as you noticed, I just unpack all of them and don't do anything further with 
them (aside from SSID and DS IEs). It would probably make sense to unpack each 
IE with length and ID and use the ID to lookup the appropriate class to unpack 
the rest of it.

I'm guessing that's what you're suggesting to add?

Cheers,
Timur.

Original comment by timur.al...@gmail.com on 13 Oct 2010 at 4:15

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi Timur,

I'm sorry, i attach the wrong file, i made a new patch with your diff,

give me your opinion on it ;)

Regards,
Sylvain 

Original comment by sylvain....@gmail.com on 13 Oct 2010 at 5:28

Attachments:

• ieee80211_timur.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi Sylvain,

Looks great. I think that's the right way to do this. Would you mind uploading 
a joint patch next, because none of these have been applied to dpkt and it 
would make sense to combine the changes?

One other thing, could you please add tests to make sure the IE decoding works 
correctly? You can probably craft a very simple packet or even add to the 
beacon packet I have in the prior tests. The tests are important for regression 
testing if there is more code added to the ieee80211 parser (and I'm sure there 
will be).

Thank you,
Timur

Original comment by timur.al...@gmail.com on 13 Oct 2010 at 5:32

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi Timur/Sylvain, 

Is the patch applied in latest revision? Where can I get the complete updated 
files with changes you guys have made?

Thanks,
Arun

Original comment by akarthik...@gmail.com on 6 Jan 2011 at 7:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Indeed - we'll get this in. Sorry for the delay, guys. There's a missing llc.py 
referenced in the tests; can you post that as well?

Original comment by dugsong on 6 Jan 2011 at 3:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

this is the last patch i have done with the lastest revision

Original comment by sylvain....@gmail.com on 6 Jan 2011 at 3:41

Attachments:

• ieee80211.patch

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have committed llc.py and the changes to ieee80211 that I and Sylvain have 
made.

Arun: the patch is now applied and you can go ahead and use it. Post back if 
you run into problems with it. I fixed one bug, but there could be more :)

Original comment by timur.al...@gmail.com on 6 Jan 2011 at 6:49

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Original comment by timur.al...@gmail.com on 6 Jan 2011 at 8:39

• Changed state: Fixed