Capwap Mailing List: Re: CAPWAP IESG Review Comment T39

[Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) (pcalhoun]

OK, closing issue 80.

PatC 

-----Original Message-----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca [at] avaya.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 10:59 AM
To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); capwap [at] frascone.com
Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP IESG Review Comment T39

OK with me. 

Dan
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pcalhoun [at] cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 8:08 PM
> To: capwap [at] frascone.com
> Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP IESG Review Comment T39
> 
> All,
> 
> Here is the IESG Review Comment:
> 
>    T39. Section 13 is insufficient. The recommendation concerning 
> non-configurability
>    of WTPs makes, sense, but what about the ACS? How are ACs 
> configured?
> It is OK to 
>    say that they are configured by proprietary CLI and/or MIB 
> interfaces that will be
>    defined in other CAPWAP document and/or by NETCONF in the future, 
> but something
>    needs to be said. 
> 
> You are correct, the CAPWAP protocol does not provide management of 
> the AC. This is assumed to be done out of band.
> I am therefore proposing the following text:
> 
> <text>
> 13.  Management Considerations
> [...]
>    The CAPWAP protocol does not deal with the management of the ACs.
>    The AC is assumed to be configured through some separate management
>    interface, which could be via a proprietary CLI, SNMP, NETCONF or 
> some
>    other management protocol.
> </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
>