Subject: Re: [Capwap] Issue 154: Should we use IPv4 Multicast Address?

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:30:19 -0700

Given the lack of interest or objections to my proposal to reject this
issue, I will consider it closed.

PatC 

-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) 
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 12:55 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [Capwap] Issue 154: Should we use IPv4 Multicast Address?

Pasi's comment was:

   Section 3.3: Should IPv4 use a well-known multicast address (instead
of 
   broadcast), too? Why not?

I'm not very familiar with the registration of a well-known multicast
address. From what I can find at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses, the procedure must
be very much the same as any other address space. That said, this has
never come up by any AC/WTP vendor before, so I question whether the
change is necessary.

My response to Pasi on his "Why not?" is that our product has never, nor
never will, do this. I can't speak for others, and will let them chime
in.

Thoughts?

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

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

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