Capwap Mailing List: Re: Issue 169: What to do with QoS tags exceeding maximum

[Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) (pcalhoun]

I will make a recommendation that we simply down-tag. I think dropping
the packet will cause nothing but a communication outage, which can lead
to a very difficult troubleshooting session. So the new text is:

<new text>
6.14.  IEEE 802.11 Station QoS Profile

   The IEEE 802.11 Station QoS Profile message element contains the
   maximum IEEE 802.11e priority tag that may be used by the station.
   Any packet received that exceeds the value encoded in this message
   element MUST be tagged using the maximum value permitted by to the
   user.  The priority tag MUST be between zero (0) and seven (7).  This
   message element MUST NOT be present without the IEEE 802.11 Station
   (see Section 6.13) message element
</new text> 

PatC
-----Original Message-----
From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) 
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:32 PM
To: capwap [at] frascone.com
Cc: Pasi.Eronen [at] nokia.com
Subject: [Capwap] Issue 169: What to do with QoS tags exceeding maximum

Pasi's comment was
> Section 6.14 says that packets exceeding this priority are either
dropped or "down-tagged" -- but it seems which of 
> these is done depends on WTP (and the AC can't even know what the WTP
does).  
> Isn't this problematic for interoperability?

Well... That's a good question. I suppose we could either make a
decision in this group, or change the format of the frame in order to
allow the AC to communicate to the WTP what behavior it should take.

Any preference? If we opt to not change the frame formats, then I would
opt for down-tagging.

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

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