add the modules Makefile

The real problem isn't the ABI key size, it's that the current net80211 API routine expects the ioctl size is fixed. If that size check wasn't there and we relied on the key request key size and verified it fit inside the ioctl buffer size then we'd be fine.

In D44920#1026551, @emaste wrote:

Can we decouple userland use in ifconfig? i.e., have ifconfig support 384 bits now

I'm sure I've seen FCSes in 802.11 bpf traces? Maybe that's happening at the 802.11 radiotap level?

oh, interesting! does 11n work on this driver in openbsd? I see some 11n stuff is commented out here.

remove the VAP keymgmt flags for now; will reintroduce it and change the
ioctl API to use that instead when it's necessary.

remove NONE, from bz@

OK, I rebuilt world and found where this breaks userland.

In D44827#1027553, @bz wrote:

This still has changes not marked "done".
Is there a change in the stack which does change the drivers to use this?

In D44820#1027551, @bz wrote:

Can you please update the commit message? Apart from that it seems fine-ish with what cc@ said.

address comments from cc@

address comments by cc@

In D44920#1026551, @emaste wrote:

Can we decouple userland use in ifconfig? i.e., have ifconfig support 384 bits now

I just removed the hw caps for now, i'll chase that up later when this stuff has landed and we've had a chance to think about how to support full supplicant/mlme management (like VERY fullmac) NICs.

push update

address comments

address comments

update to compile w/ stack changes

address comments

comments!

address feedback

update diff url

update diff url

lgtm, whats this addressing? Whats the system behaviour when the count limit is hit?

update diff url

In D44827#1024357, @cc wrote:

In D44827#1023217, @adrian wrote:

In D44827#1023209, @bz wrote:

In D44827#1023208, @adrian wrote:

eg ath(4) would do something like:

How do you want to implement ath_settkipmic() "nicely" without exposing the field?

oops my bad. it'll be a flag for hardware encryption support! I fixed the code snippet.

I don't get it. Without exposing the field ic_cryptocaps? And where is the "fixed the code snippet"?

In D44827#1024561, @bz wrote:

Are you going to change the few drivers which need change to get rid of the public exposure as well? Otherwise this is a dead code before added.

address comments from cc@

update w/ diff url

add missing RSN parsing stuff for hostapd

diff url update

add diff url

diff url

add differential link

comment from emaste

In D44827#1023673, @emaste wrote:

I find it a little confusing with the verb & noun use of set in set_software_cipher_set - do you think set_software_ciphers (or set_sw_ciphers) is reasonable?

oops, url update again

url update

url update

url update