Capwap Mailing List: Re: questions ondraft-ietf-capwap-protocol-specification-10.txt

[Yong Zhang (yozhang]

For my questiion4. I didn't notice 4.8.7 exist. So it does not need to
change the name.

The first sentence in 4.8 said "A WTP or AC that implements the CAPWAP
Discovery phase MUST allow for
   the following variables to be configured by system management".
Maybe you need to rephrase this, since 4.8.2/3/4/9 are not
configurable.

Thanks!

Yong

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)
<pcalhoun [at] cisco.com> wrote:
> 1.   4.7.10 MaxFailedDTLSSessionRetry is not a timer. Should it be put
> in 4.8?
> <PRC> Correct, and this was already raised by Dan in his review and it
> has been moved to 4.8 already.
>
> 2.  4.8.2/3/4 are running time counters. They are not configurable.
> Should they be removed from here?
> <PRC> No, these are counters, and I believe they are appropriate in this
> section. Yes, they are not configurable.
>
> 3.  4.8.8 ReportInterval. Is it a CAPWAP timer? Should it be in 4.7?
> This one seems not defined in the state machine transition. Is this for
> 4.7.14 StatisticsTimer?
> <PRC> Yes, this needs to move to section 4.7, and it is referenced in
> the Decryption Error Report message element. I have created issue 104 as
> an editorial issue.
>
> 4. 4.8.9 RetransmitCount. I think it should be called
> MaxRetransmitCount. And "This is a monotonically increasing counter"
> need to be removed.
> <PRC> I'm ok changing the name if people think it provides more clarity.
> However, it is a monotonically increasing counter - everytime a packet
> is transmitted, a RetransmitCount++ instruction is required.
>
> PatC
>