Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP IESG Review Comment T1

From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:11:55 -0700

All,

Here is the IESG Review Comment:

   T1 - a generic comment. In many protocol fields definitions the
document lacks max 
   size or max length definitions. I tried but I may have not caught
them all. Is the 
   assumption made that for all these fields always the maximum capacity
should be 
   reserved? In this case I suggest that a clarification is made in
Section 1.2. I 
   prefer however explicit definition of max size and max length
whenever needed, as 
   it is not always necessary and wise from a resources point of view to
design for 
   max values. 

Many of these instances have been addressed through other technical
comments, so I am going through the spec now and addressing what I
believe are the remaining ones:

<text>

4.6.7.  Add MAC ACL Entry
[...]
   Num of Entries:   The number of instances of the Type/MAC Addresses
      fields in the array. This value MUST NOT exceed 1024.

4.6.9.  Add Static MAC ACL Entry
[...]
   Num of Entries:   The number of instances of the Type/MAC Addresses
      fields in the array. This value MUST NOT exceed 1024.

4.6.10.  CAPWAP Control IPv4 Address
[...]
   WTP Count:   The number of WTPs currently connected to the interface,
      with a maximum value of 65535.

4.6.11.  CAPWAP Control IPv6 Address
[...]
   WTP Count:   The number of WTPs currently connected to the interface,
      with a maximum value of 65535.

4.6.22.  Delete Static MAC ACL Entry
[...]
   Num of Entries:   The number of instances of the Type/MAC Addresses
      fields in the array.  This field MUST NOT exceed the value of
      1024.
</text>

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

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