Subject: Re: [rohc] Re: Review of draft-bormann-rohc-over-802-00.txt

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:37:22 +0100

>> So the AP will simply not have that choice.
> This is what I was trying to say. No matter what encapsulation variant
> is chosen, the solution will only work if the AP is forced to use the
> chosen variant. This can only be achieved by changing in the embedded
> software running on the AP's. My question is: can this be avoided in
> any way?

Well, I'm aware that there are access points out there that can't 
properly relay LLC packets.
The solution my current draft envisions would not work with these 
access points.
(In the Apple/Mac community, this class tends to be well-known for not 
properly working with Appletalk over Ethernet.)

Basically, I'd consider these APs broken: They only partially implement 
the MAC service interface.
I don't know reason to design an AP this way.  Recent APs don't seem to 
have this shortcoming.

As the broken APs are still out there, I believe that a robust solution 
would have to detect their presence in the L3 hop, but I don't think 
they are deployed often enough to warrant explicitly designing for 
them.

Gruesse, Carsten

PS.: I submitted an update of the I-D, a preview is at 
http://www.tzi.de/~cabo/draft-bormann-rohc-over-802-01.txt

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc