Capwap Mailing List: Re: Issue 161: Ther term "Mobile" is not really accurate

[Bob O'Hara (boohara) (boohara]

STOP!  Put that editor down and step away from the draft!  I think it is
a big mistake to embed a term that is tied to a single binding into the
entirety of the draft.

 -Bob
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 6:04 PM
To: Capwap [at] frascone.com
Subject: [Capwap] Issue 161: Ther term "Mobile" is not really accurate

The term "mobile" is not really accurate when describing wireless
interfaces, since wireless does not imply mobile. Can we just use
the techie term "STA" instead.

<PRC> In my honest opinion, this is one of those change requests that is
really
unnecessary. Traditionally, the IETF has used the term mobile (e.g.,
mobile
station in Mobile IP). However, given the comment, and the fact that the
802.11 WG uses the term station, or STA for short, I will go ahead and
make the change. Of course, the next binding technology may end up using
different terminology (including mobile).

This will, of course, touch nearly every section of the specification
(read: diffs will be more complex). 

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