Subject: [Capwap] Issue 90: Using 802.3 for tunnelling in Split-MAC mode

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:32:44 -0700

All,
 
I'd like to re-open the discussion around the use of 802.3 tunneling.
When the original proponents of encapsulating 802.3 came forth, they
requested that local MAC support both local bridging and 802.3.
Consequently, the split MAC mode only supports the native frame format
(e.g., IEEE 802.11 supports 802.11 frame formats).

Puneet raised an issue that he believes that Split MAC must support
802.3 as well, and not to support any tunneling in local MAC mode.
Puneet, correct me if I am incorrect here.

Well, the issue here is that including an 802.3 frame in CAPWAP is NOT
split MAC. Many fields are lost in the translation (e.g., four address
field, 802.11e UP field). From memory, the folks that are asking for the
optional BSSID in the CAPWAP header to be optional also appears to be
the ones that are favoring this issue (90). However, if one removes the
BSSID field, how would the AC even know which BSSID an 802.1X is being
run against? The AC would lose all such information, and it's not clear
how we could support multiple SSIDs per WTP. Also not clear how IAPP
frame formats would be handled, as these would also lose their BSSID
context, which is important.

With that I would like to reopen this conversation.

Pat Calhoun
CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit
Cisco Systems
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

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

---

From: Jim Murphy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 13:42:45 -0700

> context, which is important.

802.1X frames come after the station has been associated. Therefore the
station mac address is know at the AC along with its BSSID mapping.
The source address of the 802.1X frame is used to map the frame to the
SSID.

Thanks,

Jim