Subject: Re: [Capwap] New Issue - Local MAC MUST vs MAY forward association request messages

From: "Kraus, Michael" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 08:47:51 -0500

David,
  I agree technically that in local MAC operation that this could be a MAY from
a functionality perspective.  However, then a provision for the WTP to report
summaries of when the association requests are received might be warranted to be
considered.

  Without this information, troubleshooting association requests and the
WTP/AC's failure to respond (bugs) become more difficult.  That being the case,
it might be a lesser evil to just forward on the association requests to the AC
even with a WTP in local MAC operation. (Which would keep this statement a
MUST).

Mike Kraus
Sr. Network Engineer
Applied Information Systems
Cellular Phone (314) 575-0968
Nextel direct connect: 140*1*31368
Providing solutions for ABI, Brewing Operations & Technology, Engineering

In response to:

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 08:41:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Capwap] New Issue - Local MAC MUST vs MAY forward
	association	request messages
To: Dorothy Stanley <[email-masked]>
Cc: capwap <[email-masked]>
Message-ID:
	<[email-masked]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

HI,

In a CAPWAP environment, irregardless of 802.11 association, the AC determines
the
 1) authentication
 2) authorization
and provides the management interface for tracking client
 1) status
 2) statistics
And overal system optimization.

The above attributes differentiates a coordniated collection of independent APs
from a CAPWAP system consisting of a AC and WTPs.

So, if changing to MAY does not result in loss of control needed to support any
of the above attributes, then the change would be OK. Otherwise, I don't believe
it would be a proper change.  

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Dorothy Stanley wrote:
> All,
> 
> Section 11.1.2 Local MAC describes the Local MAC operation. It 
> currently states (second paragraph below Figure 6):
> 
> While the MAC is terminated on the WTP, it is necessary for the AC to 
> be aware of mobility events within the WTPs.
> As a consequence, the WTP MUST forward the IEEE 802.11 Association 
> Requests to the AC, and the AC MAY reply with a failed Association 
> Response if it deems it necessary.
> 
> 
> Since this is the Local MAC case, it seems that a MAY should be 
> sufficient.
> 
> Recommended change:
> 
> The MAC is terminated on the WTP, but the AC may need to be aware of 
> mobility events within the WTPs.
> As a consequence, the WTP MAY forward the IEEE 802.11 Association 
> Requests to the AC, and the AC MAY reply with a failed Association 
> Response.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dorothy
Regards,
/david t. perkins

Mike Kraus
Sr. Network Engineer
Applied Information Systems
Cellular Phone (314) 575-0968
Nextel direct connect: 140*1*31368
Providing solutions for ABI, Brewing Operations & Technology, Engineering

The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.  If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

Archives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/capwap