[OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-01
Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Mon, 09 December 2013 19:59 UTC
Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFB81AE4FB for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:59:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jyKsIBaIPqB5 for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:59:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x230.google.com (mail-la0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E0D1AE08C for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:59:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f48.google.com with SMTP id n7so1919906lam.7 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 11:59:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=hbq86XL/ADLxKknLl6nnLdXHmjYQB03qWEc68tZRmzE=; b=iXA6h+74si+IZiFOYtMIJco1hPxUwMecAHgVPe8Xtndx6RjVFeaT2BvTjBJpGEEFfJ erRc4MruNatQ1BwQocWQ6mYAJn+tfqG/hym+jHKp8N5cuCrP44gpMuroQaizttI7sVBX WyyDI1QKeSXVLylXJCs7wFB3SrOMcQzrLDFFx/wDaCteRM0zQ4me55Psr7Hpn44uM4C+ 3puo+aAB8cj2NtjqheWw3X0fwi1gh4XvrWbzu9l7/qRNsUrW9nyO6RLNsLn2S12yiOne LYh5ChOVtqE5H97wAO10IA0fusUBOp6O3o6ftjNm9OepKbWWNdoA4V2u7SKUbjdnrEgJ lDUw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.1.197 with SMTP id 5mr6247659lao.0.1386619149998; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 11:59:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.115.4.165 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:59:09 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 13:59:09 -0600
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcesnRXdAGKwP_yWKox+zC7n5ayZPqJe4NVVn45AkVKp2w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
To: opsawg@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0112bfcedfdc8f04ed1f6d09"
Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-01
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 19:59:17 -0000
Hi all, I was reading this draft and had a few comments: I think the abstract has this sentence which is certainly incorrect: This lack of specification leads to interoperability between AC and WTP when AC and WTP come from different vendors. The hybrid MAC profile is defined to clarify encryption/decryption function as an improvement on split MAC profile. It is not clear why? Split MAC profile has similar ambiguity for two other functions, scheduling and fragmentation. These do not cause interoperability problems? Hybrid MAC makes specific choices for these functions but it is not explained how and why. I am not sure if the profile exchange is a good idea. How is WTP configured before the exchange? Regards, Behcet
- [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-01 Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-01 Rajesh Pazhyannur (rpazhyan)