Subject: [Capwap] revised drafts submitted and posted.

From: "Mani, Mahalingam (Mani)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:47:59 -0700

The revised CAPWAP protocol (-04) and 802.11bindings drafts (-01) are
now submitted by the editors and should appear soon on the ID-list.

They have also been posted for immediate reference at
http://www.capwap.org <http://www.capwap.org/> 

We would use these revisions for discussions in the Interim (24-25 Jan).

Regards,

-mani

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

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

---

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:11:41 -0800 (PST)

HI,

Thanks!

By the way, are the presentations for each topic as specified
on the agenda for the interim meeting available on the same
WEB site? If not now, could they be made available when completed?

> We would use these revisions for discussions in the Interim (24-25 Jan).
Regards,
/david t. perkins

---

From: "Mani, Mahalingam (Mani)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:23:15 -0700

David,

We will try to get the presentations to the website as they become
available.

More importantly, the resolutions we are able to reach on issues will be
posted to the list as soon as we can (hopefully at the end of each day)
so we can get them discussed on the list for WG approval/consensus.

-mani
-----Original Message-----
From: David T. Perkins [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 3:12 PM
To: Mani, Mahalingam (Mani)
Cc: capwap
Subject: Re: [Capwap] revised drafts submitted and posted.

HI,

Thanks!

Regards,
/david t. perkins

---

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:24:21 -0800

Thanks Mani.
 
I believe it is important that I also add the following disclaimer. The
drafts that are now available contain some text for which WG consensus
has not been reached. Of importance are issues 226 and 138. There may be
others, but these are the larger ones. The text is now integrated to
allow the reader to observe the text in the larger context. The text
will be modified to match the consensus reached during both the meeting,
and subsequently on the list.

Pat Calhoun
CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit
Cisco Systems

________________________________

	From: Mani, Mahalingam (Mani) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 2:48 PM
	To: capwap
	Subject: [Capwap] revised drafts submitted and posted.
	Importance: High

	The revised CAPWAP protocol (-04) and 802.11bindings drafts
(-01) are now submitted by the editors and should appear soon on the
ID-list.

	We would use these revisions for discussions in the Interim
(24-25 Jan).

	Regards,

	-mani

---

From: "Mani, Mahalingam (Mani)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:37:15 -0700

Pat,

When you (editors) get the time - (to have marked them so in the
issue-tracker is good; but even better if) you can summarize the set of
issues resolved to the list.

Thanks,

-mani

  _____  

From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 4:24 PM
To: Mani, Mahalingam (Mani); capwap
Subject: RE: [Capwap] revised drafts submitted and posted.

Thanks Mani.

Pat Calhoun

  _____  

	Regards,

	-mani

---

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:45:18 -0800

All of the issues in tracker assigned to me are the only ones still in
the open state. Each one of these are currently being discussed on the
list (in some fashion). They are:
226 Transition to join state
<http://www.capwap.org/cgi-bin/roundup/CAPWAP/issue226>   - New proposed
text has been sent to the list, and is included in the latest draft.
227 Need Shim Header to indicate crypto property of packet
<http://www.capwap.org/cgi-bin/roundup/CAPWAP/issue227>  - There is
disagreement on the use of the preamble for data frames. Will be
discussed at the interim meeting.
231 Need clarifications on Image Data Transfer
<http://www.capwap.org/cgi-bin/roundup/CAPWAP/issue231>   - I believe
Dave has raised a couple of issues he would like to have addressed
146 Updated proposal for packet formats
<http://www.capwap.org/cgi-bin/roundup/CAPWAP/issue146>   - Dave just
sent another e-mail with a wish list of changes he wants for the header.
I still don't understand what the problems are that he is trying to
solve, so I assume these will be discussed this week.
87 Use of DTLS for CAPWAP data channel
<http://www.capwap.org/cgi-bin/roundup/CAPWAP/issue87>   (related to
issue 227) - Similar issue to 227.

Pat Calhoun

	From: Mani, Mahalingam (Mani) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 4:37 PM
	To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); capwap
	Subject: RE: [Capwap] revised drafts submitted and posted.

	Pat,

	Thanks,

	-mani

	Thanks Mani.

	I believe it is important that I also add the following
disclaimer. The drafts that are now available contain some text for
which WG consensus has not been reached. Of importance are issues 226
and 138. There may be others, but these are the larger ones. The text is
now integrated to allow the reader to observe the text in the larger
context. The text will be modified to match the consensus reached during
both the meeting, and subsequently on the list.

	Pat Calhoun

		The revised CAPWAP protocol (-04) and 802.11bindings
drafts (-01) are now submitted by the editors and should appear soon on
the ID-list.

		We would use these revisions for discussions in the
Interim (24-25 Jan).

		Regards,

		-mani

---

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:14:40 -0800 (PST)

HI,

In the message below, you indicated that I had just sent
email with "a wish list of changes he wants for the header"
and indicated that you don't understand the problems
the changes are trying to solve.

I'd appreciate any specific questions about the changes
so that I can address them. I tried to justify each change,
and was handicapped by not having the CAPWAP-04 spec
in font of me. Now that it is available, I'll go back
and check to see if the issues I raised were addressed.
However, I would appreciate specific questions.

regards,
/david t. perkins