Capwap Mailing List: IESG Review Comment T22

All,

Here is the IESG Review Comment:

   T22 - Sections 4.2.24, 4.2.25 - why are the length field defined as
>= 12, and >= 
   24 respectively. Is this triplicate addresses? Or more? And if such
cases exist, is 
   this important to detect and report all in one message? 

I'm not sure that the comment makes sense since the length of the field
is correct. In both cases we assume a minimum MAC Address length of 6
octets. I believe this comment is invalid.

PatC

IESG Review Comment T22	<– Date –> <– Thread –>
From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) (pcalhouncisco.com)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 08:36:45 -0700 (PDT)