Subject: [Capwap] Issue 248:Both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses not required

From: "Dorothy Stanley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 10:41:13 -0800

Issue 248, listed below has been opened:

The CAPWAP Control IPv4 Address and CAPWAP Control IPv6 address
message elements are both listed as elements that MUST be included
in the Primary Discovery Response and Join Response messages.

Only one of the two messages elements should be required. This change,
applied to the Discovery Request message, should also be made to the
Primary DiscoveryRespponse and Join Response messages.
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

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

---

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 14:05:56 -0800

Dorothy,
 
I would propose replicating the change applied for the Discovery
Response message to the Primary Discovery Response message, which is:

   o  One of the following message elements MUST be included in the
      Discovery Response Message:

      *  CAPWAP Control IPv4 Address, see Section 4.5.10

      *  CAPWAP Control IPv6 Address, see Section 4.5.11

The Discovery Request message and the Primary Discovery Request message
do not require this message element.

Pat Calhoun
CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit
Cisco Systems

________________________________

	From: Dorothy Stanley [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 10:41 AM
	To: capwap
	Subject: [Capwap] Issue 248:Both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses not
required

	The CAPWAP Control IPv4 Address and CAPWAP Control IPv6 address 
	message elements are both listed as elements that MUST be
included
	in the Primary Discovery Response and Join Response messages.
	
	Only one of the two messages elements should be required. This
change,
	applied to the Discovery Request message, should also be made to
the
	Primary DiscoveryRespponse and Join Response messages.

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:37:58 -0500

This looks right to me.

Margaret