Subject: [Capwap] Issue 159: Question on CAPWAP control protocol

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:58:43 -0700

Pasi's question was:

   Section 4.5.3: Is CAPWAP control protocol strictly "lock-step" (once
you send 
   a Request, you must wait for Response until you send another
Request), or are 
   multiple outstanding requests allowed?  Can you "give up" a Request
(stop 
   retransmitting it even though you haven't received a Response), and
move to 
   the next Request?  What should you do if you receive a Request with a
Sequence 
   Number that's too old (less than previous Request you've seend) or
too new 
   (greater than previous Request+1)?

No, the protocol only allows a single request at any given time. This
has fundamentally been how the original LWAPP protocol was also built.
We've discussed this many times, both through the protocol evaluation
phase, as well as the CAPWAP protocol development phase, and never saw a
need to change it. Shipping products have also showed that for this
particular application, it is sufficient.

I propose rejecting this comment.

PatC
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

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

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:52:35 +0300

This was really a question asking for clarification, not a request to 
allow multiple parallel requests.

E.g., there doesn't seem to be text prohibiting multiple pending
requests. Quite the opposite, in fact -- Section 4.5.1.2 says "counter
is monotonically incremented, ensuring that no two pending Request
messages have the same Sequence Number".

The document also doesn't say anything about rejecting old requests 
(with sequence number smaller than expected), or how to process
"too new" requests. 

Best regards,
Pasi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: 29 July, 2008 18:59
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki)
> Subject: Issue 159: Question on CAPWAP control protocol
> 
> Pasi's question was:
>