Capwap Mailing List: Re: need clarification on UDP ports

[Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) (pcalhoun]

Not pushing for the hack. I've stated I do not object to a third UDP
port, but provided an alternative should IANA refuse to give it to us.

Pat Calhoun
CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit
Cisco Systems

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott G. Kelly [mailto:s.kelly [at] ix.netcom.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 1:24 PM
> To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); Hasan Raza; pagarwal [at] broadcom.com
> Cc: capwap
> Subject: RE: [Capwap] need clarification on UDP ports
> 
> "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" wrote:
> 
> >Except we can document that any CAPWAP implementation receiving a 
> >packet with  'n' zeroes uses DTLS header format foo, which 
> is of lengh 'y'.
> 
> ...except that it is decidedly *not* a DTLS header, right? 
> I'm having a really hard time understanding why you're 
> pushing for a hack at any/all costs to solve this problem. We 
> are at the design stage - if there were ever a time to do it 
> right, that time is now. Exactly what will break if we don't 
> adopt this hack?
> 
> Scott
>