1019691 - WLAN connect priority order

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Firefox OS Graveyard :: Wifi, defect)

Description

[Ravi Dandu]

WLAN network connect priority must be able to specified. If several SSIDs are detected by the device, the priority SHALL be:
--Secure networks: WEP, WPA, WPA2 SSID, Operator managed network, 802.1x SSID,(Secured with EAP-SIM, WPA2 Enterprise, or manual authentication after pairing)
--Open networks with no security, unsecured OPEN SSID

The order must be controlled by a post build configuration.

Comment 1

[howie [:howie]]

Hi Wilfred & Ravi, when you say in a post build configuration, you mean during run time right? Also, The priority order is displaying order or connecting order? Or both? Thanks.

Comment 2

[howie [:howie]]

Also, by what method you want to let user choose different priority? Or should just follow the priority you provided in description. And how we tell if it's a operator managed network?

Comment 3

[Wilfred Mathanaraj [:WDM]]

* post build meaning - the OEM must be able to configure the order via a e.g. json file after the build.
* priority order is both  - displaying and connecting order. 
* its not the user that chooses the priority order but the OEM based on operator requirements (the priority order given above is just an example)
* telling operator networks is not a need in the priority order if we are unable to differentiate this from other networks

Comment 4

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

1. I think we should take Signal strength into consideration, it's might not what user's expect to see a WPA network with poor signal listed before a OPEN network with good signal.
2. Is this behavior just for showing network in settings app or also a policy while auto-select network.

Comment 5

[Ravi Dandu]

About 2), this can be used while auto-selecing network also. 

About 1) Signal strength, thats a good point. Can we bucketize the visible APs into high, med, low. and sort within each bucket.

Wilfred, will this be acceptable to the customer.

Comment 6

[Wilfred Mathanaraj [:WDM]]

this is acceptable

Comment 7

[Ravi Dandu]

Ok. FYI: Bug 1010127 tracks the work that has been done to sort APs in order of signal strength. This feature of giving partners/OEMs control of order (secure and open) will be an enhancement to that bug 1010127.

Comment 8

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

Hi all, please provide feedback for our plan for this request:

1. Add a customizable settings [1], 'wifi.sort', provides two values: 'signal' and 'security'.
   We do not prefer to provide unlimited choices of sorting method.
2. In Settings app,
   'wifi.sort' = 'signal': sort AP in the order of Signal, Security, SSID, Not in Range(bug 1010127)
   'wifi.sort' = 'security': sort AP in the order of Security, Signal, SSID, Not in Range.
3. In Gecko, wifi signal and AP list is always changing, so we can't guarantee the connection order is always as expected. But we will provide:
   'wifi.sort' = 'signal': Put known APs at same priority level and let gonk to choose best target. Once connected, device won't switch to another better-signal AP until current AP is lost.
   'wifi.sort' = 'security': Put known APs in four priority level and let gonk to choose best target. Once connected, device won't switch to another better-signal AP until current AP is lost. But it will switch to AP of higher priority then current AP once it is known and discovered.
   But user assigned AP will always have highest connection priority than others.
4. The order of Security is 'WPA-EAP', 'WPA-PSK', 'WEP', then 'OPEN'.
   The order of SSID is Alphabetical ascending.

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox_OS/Developing_Gaia/Market_customizations_guide#settings.json

Comment 9

[Arthur Chen [:arthurcc][inactive after 6/30]]

The proposal looks good to me, thanks!

Comment 10

[Vincent Chang[:vchang][changyihsin]]

Can we make settings more flexible that application can specify the sort order ?  

For instance,  
settings.sort.priority = [ssid, signal, security, not in a range] which means ssid has highest priority. 
settings.sort.ssid = ["openxxxx", "mozilla-guest".....]

Comment 11

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

(In reply to Vincent Chang[:vchang] from comment #10)
> Can we make settings more flexible that application can specify the sort
> order ?  
> 
> For instance,  
> settings.sort.priority = [ssid, signal, security, not in a range] which
> means ssid has highest priority. 
> settings.sort.ssid = ["openxxxx", "mozilla-guest".....]

I won't prefer such detailed configuration for it will make the settings becomes too complex and easy to make mistakes like typo. And we might have to support more special sort conditions like alphabetically order or the highlight ssid list above.

I think such detailed sorting should be handled by partners.

Comment 12

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

I think we also need inputs from Gaia.

Comment 13

[EJ Chen [:eragonj][:小龍哥][Contributor mode on](inactive)]

(In reply to Vincent Chang[:vchang] from comment #10)
> Can we make settings more flexible that application can specify the sort
> order ?  
> 
> For instance,  
> settings.sort.priority = [ssid, signal, security, not in a range] which
> means ssid has highest priority. 

From my personal perspective, I don't think this needs to be customized and it would be better to sort in the same way in every device. If we make this as an customizable choices for partners, users would definitely get confused why his previous phone (e.g. Flame with 2.2 FxOS installed) works differently compared with his new phone (e.g. another phone provided by partners with 2.2 FxOS installed). 

To be honest, I don't see any benefit here to provide this customization for partners.

> settings.sort.ssid = ["openxxxx", "mozilla-guest".....]

Compared with previous customization option, this one definitely scares me a lot. By doing so, all aps with any ssid in the list would get sorted as high priority on the screen. But, if this list was known by crackers, they can definitely fake their ap as anyone on the list to attract users to connect with. If users got pranked in such situation and lost any critical data or money, I am sure this would hurt our branding a lot because this is FxOS.

--

For me, comment 8 may be enough but we can still discuss more ! Any idea or comment would be appreciated :)

Comment 14

[Arthur Chen [:arthurcc][inactive after 6/30]]

I agree with EJ. Providing the options as the original proposal should be sufficient for most of the use cases.

Comment 15

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

Since most comments prefers proposal in comment 8, I'll just make a WIP patch for it.
Just found an advantage of that proposal is, gecko apply same algorithm to prioritize networks(Security then SSID). So we odon't have to add new API or read settings to control the priority.

Comment 16

[Chuck Lee [:chucklee, Triggered by NI, Review, and Feedback requests]]

Attachment: Network priority order by security then SSID.

Comment 17

[Vincent Chang[:vchang][changyihsin]]

Comment on attachment 8510948 [details] [diff] [review]
Network priority order by security then SSID.

Review of attachment 8510948 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The patch itself looks good, however, I talked offline that add priority property to wpa_supplicant makes may cause wifi connection been disabled when higher priority AP is detected. It seems not good for user experience. We should address this problem before landing this patch.

Comment 18

[Ravi Dandu]

The WiFi connection should be seamless when higher priority AP is detected. User should not see dropping of data.

Comment 19

[BMO Automation]

Firefox OS is not being worked on