Capwap Mailing List: Re: CAPWAP IESG Issue T5

[Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) (pcalhoun]

OK, again I need you and Dan to agree. I will make whatever change is
necessary.

Dan are you ok with zero being marked as reserved?

PatC 

-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret [at] thingmagic.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:50 AM
To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)
Cc: capwap [at] frascone.com
Subject: Re: [Capwap] CAPWAP IESG Issue T5


Hi Pat,

I agree with your answer -- this is not a bitmask.

But, I'd personally prefer that we _not_ renumber the fields at this
point.  If we do renumber them, this will make -11 incompatible with -10
in a way that I don't feel is justified by the benefit.  Instead, I'd
personally prefer that you list 0 as "reserved for future use"  
and make it clear in the IANA considerations section that value 4-31 are
available for IANA allocation.

There are already implementations of CAPWAP, and EPCglobal is planning
an interoperability event in July (for the base CAPWAP spec and the
EPCglobal DCI specification), so I think it is too late to start
renumbering fields without an important technical reason to do so.

Margaret



On Jun 16, 2008, at 11:35 AM, Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) wrote:

> Here is the IESG Issue:
>
>    T5 - Section 4.3, pag 47 - As I understand the 5 bit field encodes 
> 32 possible
>    wireless bindings (i.e. it's not a bit mask). If true it would be 
> good to make this
>    explicit. My question is whether there is any reason to start with 
> value 1 and not
>    with value 0? Assuming this is already deployed, will 0 be a value 
> to use, or does
>    it have any special significance?
>
> No, this is not a bitmask. I'm not actually sure how to explicitely 
> state it isn't a bitmask, because in my mind any field is not a 
> bitmask unless it is explicitely stated, so I will use the term 
> numerical.
> Further, there is no reason why zero cannot be used, so I'll renumber 
> the fields to start at zero.
>
> So I am proposing the following text:
>
> <text>
>    WBID:  A 5 bit numerical field which is the wireless binding
>       identifier.  The numerical identifier will indicate the type
>       of wireless packet associated with the radio.  The following
>       numerical values are defined:
>
>       0 -  IEEE 802.11
>       1 -  IEEE 802.16
>       2 -  EPCGlobal
> </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

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

Archives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/capwap