Subject: [Capwap] FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-capwap-base-mib

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:10:38 +0100

Richard,

Please address the issues raised by Pasi in his DISCUSS.

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Pasi Eronen
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:07 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-capwap-base-mib 

Discuss:
I have reviewed draft-ietf-capwap-base-mib-08, and have couple of small
questions that I'd like to discuss before recommending approval of the
document:

- The MIB provides a writable object for switching between X.509 certs
and PSK authentication for DTLS.  Since the MIB can't actually configure
the PSK (or X.509 certificate and corresponding private key, for that
matter), is this object actually useful?

- It seems capwapBaseWtpState indicates the AC's CAPWAP FSM state for
each WTP, not the WTP's FSM? (which, at any single point of time, be
slighly different)

- Section 9.1/9.2: it looks like these should be new CAPWAP Message
Element Types, not Vendor Specific Payloads? (and the current text
doesn't say what vendor ID would be used)

- Why is "dns" allowed as capwapBaseWtpStateWtpIpAddressType?  (the AC
obviously sees the IP address the WTP's connection comes from, but not
the DNS name?)

- capwapBaseWtpStateWtpIpAddressType: is this the IP address of the WTP
as seen by the AC, or as sent in the "CAPWAP Local IPv4/6 Address"
message element?

- A question: Did the WG consider including NAT-related information
CapwapBaseWtpStateEntry? For example, whether NAT was detected, and what
the other address (depending on the question above) was?

- capwapBaseMacAclId: this seems to limit the number of ACL entries to
255 -- why? (although RFC 5415 doesn't support sending more than 255 ACL
entries in a single "Add MAC ACL Entry" message element, the AC could
send more than one of those)

- capwapBaseWtpProfileWtpStaticIpType: How would the "ipv4z" type be
used by the CAPWAP protocol? (it doesn't seem to use the zone index in
any way)

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

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