| Re: IESG Review Comment T24 | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Margaret Wasserman (margaret |
|
| Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:52:02 -0700 (PDT) | |
I'm personally not wild about changing the packet formats at this point, but there does appear to be a technical justification for this change...
Are there actually systems on which you wouldn't know the packet size at this layer, though? Or is this just a theoretical technical justification?
Margaret
On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) wrote:
All,
Here is the IESG Review Comment:
T24 - Sections 4.6.27, 4.6.28 - should not these two messages include
length of the
Value fields?
Originally, this was not included, because it could be inferred.
However, I can imagine a software architecture where the packet size is
not known when the message elements are parsed. So I have added them:
<text> 4.6.27. Image Data [...]
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Data Type | Data Length | Data .... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ [...]
Data: Length of data field, with a maximum size of 1024.
Data: The Image Data field contains up to 1024 characters. If the
block being sent is the last one, the Opcode is set to 2. The AC
MAY opt to abort the data transfer by setting the Opcode to 5.
When the Opcode is 5, the Value field has a zero length.
4.6.28. Image Identifier [...] 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Vendor Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Value Length | Data...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ [...]
Data: Length of data field, with a maximum size of 65535.
Data: A variable length UTF-8 encoded string containing the firmware identifier to be run on the WTP. </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
-
IESG Review Comment T24 Pat Calhoun (pacalhou), June 16 2008
-
Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Romascanu, Dan (Dan), June 17 2008
- Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Pat Calhoun (pacalhou), June 18 2008
- Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Margaret Wasserman, June 17 2008
-
Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Margaret Wasserman, June 17 2008
- Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Pat Calhoun (pacalhou), June 18 2008
- Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Margaret Wasserman, June 19 2008
- Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Pat Calhoun (pacalhou), June 19 2008
-
Re: IESG Review Comment T24 Romascanu, Dan (Dan), June 17 2008
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.