Subject: [Capwap] Proposed resolution to issue 190

From: "Michael Montemurro" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:41:56 -0500

This issue deals with issues with the configuration update response.
Two result codes have been added for the WTP to indicate that:
1) The WTP could not apply the configuration but will offer service.
2) The WTP could not apply the configuration but will not offer service.

Cheers,

Mike
_________________________________________________________________
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: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 07:18:11 -0800

Michael,

The issue seems to have two sub-issues. the first, identified as 42, is
addressed with your suggestion below, for which proposed text was
provided
via issue 73. The second sub-issue, identified as 41, states that the
CAPWAP
protocol does not support APs that have no (or limited) nonvolatile
memory.
I do not believe we have provided text to support the latter. The
problem statement which was published by the CAPWAP WG does not mention
that memory was an issue for traditional APs, and do I believe it is in
the working group's scope to solve this problem.

I would therefore propose we reject this issue. 

Pat Calhoun
CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit
Cisco Systems

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 3:42 AM
> To: capwap
> Subject: [Capwap] Proposed resolution to issue 190
>

---

From: "Michael Montemurro" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 03:22:06 -0500

Pat.

I agree with this approach.

Cheers,

Mike