Lwapp Mailing List: RE: Another Way to Think about CAPWAP

[Pat R. Calhoun (pcalhoun]

Title: RE: [Lwapp] Another Way to Think about CAPWAP

>> I do not agree with your opinion of SNMP (it would be beneficial if you
>> could list a few problems in using SNMP). SNMP SMI has the appropriate
>> Information Model to manage routing. The SNMP transport protocol may
>> not be appropriate for carrying routing information in a "mesh"
>> network.
>>
>
>Since SNMP has objects, it could be used to describe routing but it isn't.
>Why? OSPF and IS-IS are used for that. I believe it is the type of
>information and time scale of the exchange that is important. The type of
>information for a routing protocol consists of routes, hosts, and
>information on link conditions. That is precisely the kind of information
>that needs to be exchanged between access points. SNMP is for retreiving and
>setting static configuration and logging information, not for controlling
>link conditions and host location. Of course, it could be used for that, but
>I think it would be a misuse of the protocol.

Another analogy is L2TP. Since CAPWAP is trying to split the AP in a similar way
that L2TP has split a NAS function, I think the fact that l2TP does not use SNMP
to control the LAC in real-time. Again, SNMP could be used, when it does get tricky
to design a state machine that relies on multiple protocols. This can lead to some
rather unfortunate race conditions, and is very difficult to ensure correct timing of
operations.

PatC

PatC