[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kismet-wireless
Subject:    Re: [KISMET] Channel display for data packets?
From:       Mike Kershaw <dragorn () nerv-un ! net>
Date:       2002-07-31 23:07:30
[Download RAW message or body]

> What if, when kismet saw a beacon frame/assoc response it added to
> a hashtable indexed by the AP MAC address with the trasmitting channel number
> as the value. Then when you see a data frame you could read the AP
> mac and find the transmitting channel. Not quite sure why you'd want to do
> this, but I think it would work.
> 

This already happens - always has.  

This was (or at least, I assumed it was) about data-only networks.

-m


> jjh
> 
> >Kismet extracts channel info from the 802.11 frames.  802.11 data frames
> >do not contain channel info.
> >
> >While it is possible on some cards to get the channel, even then you have
> >channel overlap innately and accelerated by noise, motion, etc - you get
> >a 
> >packet when you're on channel 6, but the packet itself may have been 
> >transmitted on 7, or 5, or perhaps even 9, though 2-channel differences
> are
> >rare.
> >
> >Theres just no way to tell w/out a frame that contains the channel in the
> >header.
> >
> >-m
> >
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 01:07:29PM -0400, Matthew Carpenter wrote:
> >> Why not?  Obviously the card has to be able to tell which channel it's
> >> on...  Is this just not a part of the PF_PACKET or Prism2 header info?
> >> 
> >> On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 09:27:33 -0500 (CDT)
> >> "alex medvedev" <alexm@pycckue.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Jason Straight wrote:
> >> > > Just curious as to why the channel isn't displayed for data packets?
> >> > 
> >> > channel info is not in a data frame
> >> > 
> >> > -alexm
> >
> >-- 
> >"Dear Die-ary,
> >    Today I stuffed some dolls with dead rats I put in a blender.
> >    I'm beginning to wonder if, maybe, I really am screwed up."
> >                   -- Johnny C. (JtHM)
> 

-- 
"Let me assure you that at First National, you're not just a number.
You're two numbers, a dash, three more numbers, another dash, and
another number." - James Estes


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]