Subject: [Capwap] Renumbering of Message Elements

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:11:53 -0400

Hi Pat,

In reviewing the diffs for the -11 base specification, it seems that  
you unnecessarily renumbered many of the message elements between  
versions -10 and -11.  I know that you had to number the Message  
Elements that were TBD in the spec to resolve Issue 52, but I  
understood that you would retain the existing numbers and renumber  
the TBD elements with unused numbers.

As is, this creates a big, unnecessary incompatibility between -10  
and -11, and I'd prefer that this is corrected before publication, if  
possible.

Margaret

_________________________________________________________________
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: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:23:06 -0700

Ah, yes, I believe when we removed a message element, everything got
renumbered. We will deal with this as an IETF Last Call comment. I have
created issue 149 to track this.

PatC 

-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 3:12 PM
To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Renumbering of Message Elements

Hi Pat,

In reviewing the diffs for the -11 base specification, it seems that you
unnecessarily renumbered many of the message elements between versions
-10 and -11.  I know that you had to number the Message Elements that
were TBD in the spec to resolve Issue 52, but I understood that you
would retain the existing numbers and renumber the TBD elements with
unused numbers.

As is, this creates a big, unnecessary incompatibility between -10 and
-11, and I'd prefer that this is corrected before publication, if
possible.

Margaret

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:59:42 -0400

Thanks, Pat!  Fixing this during IETF Last Call is fine with me.

Margaret