From capwap-admin@frascone.com Fri Jul 01 13:54:11 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DoPiN-0003ka-0Y for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 13:54:11 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA22101 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:54:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED1B20608; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:54:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F08205B3; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:54:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA37205B3 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (tiere.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01FB7204DA for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:53:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j61HopsO027017 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:50:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cof110avexu1.global.avaya.com (h135-9-6-16.avaya.com [135.9.6.16]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j61HonsO026995 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:50:50 -0400 (EDT) x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C57E65.C398099A" Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Taxonomy draft now an RFC Thread-Index: AcV+Zb1mzfqy4GdLQnaERbq1aWdNLw== X-Priority: 1 Priority: Urgent Importance: high From: "Mani, Mahalingam (Mahalingam)" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Taxonomy draft now an RFC Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 11:53:18 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C57E65.C398099A Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just received notification that Architecture Taxonomy Draft has been published - RFC4118 =20 =20 Thanks to all in WG (and IEEE 802.11 liaison) in their contributions by way of discussions, critical review and text. Special thanks to Editor(s), authors and all design team contributors (and their organizations for sharing their architectural perspective). =20 Regards, -Chairs =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C57E65.C398099A Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just received notification that Architecture Taxonomy = Draft has been published - RFC4118

 

Thanks to all in WG (and IEEE 802.11 liaison) in = their contributions by way of discussions, critical review and = text.

Special thanks to Editor(s), authors and all design = team contributors (and their organizations for sharing their architectural = perspective).

 

Regards,

-Chairs

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C57E65.C398099A-- _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From 719khoanh@access-one.com Tue Jul 05 17:34:44 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dpv40-0008Ft-56 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:34:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA01966 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 17:34:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DpvQb-0001OF-Sg for capwap-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:58:07 -0400 Received: from g219070.upc-g.chello.nl ([80.57.219.70]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Dpuzj-0001YI-Gv for capwap-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:30:20 -0400 Message-ID: <2e5201c581a6$39cbe4b2$058b6b5a@access-one.com> From: "Richard K. Lee" <719khoanh@access-one.com> To: capwap-archive@ietf.org Subject: =?iso-8859-1?B?Q2lhbGlzIC0gTm8gcHJlc2NyaXB0aW9uIG5lZWRlZCE=?= Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:12:09 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_D8C0F0E1.B4B11648" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express V6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_D8C0F0E1.B4B11648 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0001_D9C74B17.4A3CAD3B" ------=_NextPart_001_0001_D9C74B17.4A3CAD3B Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hard erection Prolonged effect No prescription needed Only $2.99/$1.99 per dose (2 doses in each pill): CIALIS - http://www.a-pills.com/sv/ VIAGRA - http://www.a-pills.com/vt/ Discreet packaging _________________________________________________________________________ To be taken out, go here _________________________________________________________________________ ------=_NextPart_001_0001_D9C74B17.4A3CAD3B Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hard erection
Prolonged effect
No prescription needed

Only $2.99/$1.99 per dose (2 doses in each pill):
CIALIS - http://www.a-pills.com/sv/
VIAGRA - http://www.a-pills.com/vt/

Discreet packaging


_________________________________________________________________________
To be taken out, go here
_________________________________________________________________________

------=_NextPart_001_0001_D9C74B17.4A3CAD3B-- ------=_NextPart_000_0000_D8C0F0E1.B4B11648-- From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 05 20:41:58 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DpxzC-0005xo-0p for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:41:58 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA27144 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:41:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 062702050C; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:24:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9DA204FC; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:24:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550ED204FE for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:23:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.202]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C31204E1 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:23:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 36so1023283wra for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:23:54 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=TWmJPl0G2GvIo8amEcRsjjlUuZx19dJ6dis2sMUhp/+RveQYr65mAEuCaJX9+aDlHVPn2K6dH93ESPBYaGNztTWVOVrP0GF+Q/4ilGtAJByK5qWFnMyoXBWXebab7ot+FvolW3xagHIn4Rgl8/WpduM1Rnfoom51EPWYmESefyU= Received: by 10.54.3.17 with SMTP id 17mr4766170wrc; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.57.49 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 17:23:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Clint Chaplin Reply-To: Clint Chaplin To: internet-drafts@ietf.org Cc: i-d-announce@ietf.org, capwap@frascone.com In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 17:23:54 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Why am I getting a tombstone when I try to access this I-D? On 7/5/05, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direct= ories. > This draft is a work item of the Control And Provisioning of Wireless Acc= ess Points Working Group of the IETF. >=20 > Title : CAPWAP Tunneling Protocol (CTP) > Author(s) : I. Singh, et al. > Filename : draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt > Pages : 41 > Date : 2005-7-5 >=20 > With the overwhelming choice of proprietary implementations of > centralized control and management of wireless access points and > access controllers there is a great demand for a standard protocol > and architecture that enables the deployment of large scale wireless > networks. >=20 > This document describes the CAPWAP Tunneling Protocol, a protocol > that allows for the centralized control and provisioning of a large > number of wireless access points from access controllers. It is > supported by an architecture where the MAC layer of the RF technology > is terminated within the AP. This allows for the protocol to be > extensible to multiple radio technologies. It assumes an IP > connection between the access points and access controllers and has > signaling primitives to enable wireless station mobility between > access points. Therefore, seamless Layer 3 subnet mobility is > seamlessly enabled by this protocol. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt >=20 > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of th= e message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. >=20 >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the usern= ame > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt". >=20 > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 >=20 > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >=20 > Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. > In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt". >=20 > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail read= ers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. >=20 >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >=20 >=20 >=20 --=20 Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin Wireless Security Technologist Wireless Standards Manager _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 05 22:08:08 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DpzKa-0005xa-9F for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:08:08 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA06262 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:08:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F0F205F9; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:08:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3DA420445; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:08:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09DBC20445 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (tiere.net.avaya.com [198.152.12.100]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E31571FE1B for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:07:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j6624ZsO027288 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:04:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cof110avexu1.global.avaya.com (h135-9-6-16.avaya.com [135.9.6.16]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id j6624YsO027261 for ; Tue, 5 Jul 2005 22:04:34 -0400 (EDT) x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt Thread-Index: AcWBwRUrTjucJ1BqQg2xtRThuGicTAADesiA From: "Mani, Mahalingam (Mahalingam)" To: "Clint Chaplin" Cc: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:07:03 -0600 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is in error. I have notified internet-drafts as well; and we should see a resolution sometime tomorrow, hopefully. -mani =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -----Original Message----- From: capwap-admin@frascone.com [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Clint Chaplin Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 5:24 PM To: internet-drafts@ietf.org Cc: i-d-announce@ietf.org; capwap@frascone.com Subject: [Capwap] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt Why am I getting a tombstone when I try to access this I-D? On 7/5/05, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > This draft is a work item of the Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points Working Group of the IETF. >=20 > Title : CAPWAP Tunneling Protocol (CTP) > Author(s) : I. Singh, et al. > Filename : draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt > Pages : 41 > Date : 2005-7-5 >=20 > With the overwhelming choice of proprietary implementations of > centralized control and management of wireless access points and > access controllers there is a great demand for a standard protocol > and architecture that enables the deployment of large scale wireless > networks. >=20 > This document describes the CAPWAP Tunneling Protocol, a protocol > that allows for the centralized control and provisioning of a large > number of wireless access points from access controllers. It is > supported by an architecture where the MAC layer of the RF technology > is terminated within the AP. This allows for the protocol to be > extensible to multiple radio technologies. It assumes an IP > connection between the access points and access controllers and has > signaling primitives to enable wireless station mobility between > access points. Therefore, seamless Layer 3 subnet mobility is > seamlessly enabled by this protocol. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt >=20 > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. >=20 >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username > "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, > type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt". >=20 > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 >=20 > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >=20 > Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. > In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-singh-capwap-ctp-02.txt". >=20 > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. >=20 >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >=20 >=20 >=20 --=20 Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin Wireless Security Technologist Wireless Standards Manager _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From mutisia@doneasy.com Wed Jul 06 18:34:52 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DqITj-0003ft-Nl; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 18:34:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA06589; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 18:34:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DqIum-0004Iy-2z; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 19:02:49 -0400 Received: from 68-187-225-139.dhcp.oxfr.ma.charter.com ([68.187.225.139]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1DqITg-0007c9-D6; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 18:34:48 -0400 Received: from elk.kwshyj.denture.wholesome.com by remitted.charta.calamity.com (ydhupfix) with SMTP id 3B29E820561 for ; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 21:32:58 -0200 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 20:25:58 -0300 From: "Branden Lang" To: Subject: Just approved mortage rate X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 2.2 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.m0rtgag3.com/signs.asp Best Regards, Ina Spears to be remov(ed: http://www.m0rtgag3.com/deletion.asp this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From untidy@emailaccount.com Thu Jul 07 16:33:52 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqd4C-00036R-CY; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 16:33:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA29605; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:33:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ironton-ubr1-70-35-110-127.ironoh.adelphia.net ([70.35.110.127]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DqdVN-0004f5-6g; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:01:59 -0400 Received: from kqkr.biz by crushohw (gl.0ua) id fkhlxykjlq with SMTP; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 23:27:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20041bdhmz3.ED8DA244AE@mailhost1w.lists.techtarget.com> Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:23:27 -0400 From: "Gilda Crowley" To: bofchairs@ietf.org Cc: bounces-ietf@ietf.org, bridge-mib@ietf.org, bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org, business@ietf.org, capwap-archive@ietf.org, cclark@ietf.org, cdi-archive@ietf.org, cfrg@ietf.org, cfrg-admin@ietf.org Subject: Approval rate accepted X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.free-d0llars.com/signs.asp Best Regards, Claudio Mayer to be remov(ed: http://www.free-d0llars.com/deletion.asp this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 07 17:26:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqdsn-0000TO-Dz for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:26:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA06549 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:26:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F74F2062E; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:26:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE50F2061D; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:26:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC6D2061D for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:25:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext04.nokia.com (mgw-ext04.nokia.com [131.228.20.96]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1747C20618 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 17:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext04.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j67LKLCX013670; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 00:20:25 +0300 Received: from daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.112]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 8 Jul 2005 00:25:20 +0300 Received: from mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.64.23]) by daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:25:14 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <893AE265F4ADF94AB7FB26D31A788E410C122D@mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com> Thread-Topic: CAPWAP WGLC on draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt Thread-Index: AcWDOlrqyoWa+7IoTi6UhbK26Xa/5g== From: To: Cc: , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jul 2005 21:25:14.0670 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D4E94E0:01C5833A] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP WGLC on draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:25:13 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is the announcement of the CAPWAP WG Last Call for comments on the = draft "Objectives for Control and Provisioning of Wireless Access = Points" prior to sending this draft to the IESG. The draft is available = on the IETF archive at: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt The CAPWAP WG Last Call will end on Friday, July 22, 2005. Please = review and provide comments to the CAPWAP WG mailing list by then. Best Regards, WG Chairs _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From quarter@yebox.com Fri Jul 08 14:41:22 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dqxms-0001lT-RD; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 14:41:22 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05191; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 14:41:20 -0400 (EDT) From: quarter@yebox.com Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DqyEH-0001TN-RV; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 15:09:43 -0400 Received: from pc-245-184-120-200.cm.vtr.net ([200.120.184.245]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Dqxmk-0005NF-KS; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 14:41:15 -0400 Received: from NCOIPdsyb.com (EHLO auxwi-a.stearns.EX.msh.net) revile by mail.mtk.nao.ac.jp (2.0[2 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 14:41:15 -0400 X-Spam-Score: 4.0 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2eba37fe9c77781b0ecb0a74d8c65128 From nyman@fadmail.com Fri Jul 08 21:58:02 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dr4bS-0005UJ-7K; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 21:58:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA27492; Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:58:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dr52v-0008CD-Bt; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 22:26:27 -0400 Received: from dsl-200-95-0-169.prod-infinitum.com.mx ([200.95.0.169]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Dr4b7-0001IO-IS; Fri, 08 Jul 2005 21:57:59 -0400 Received: from tensile.tbapta.g.schweitzer.com by benefit.ronald.sacred.com (kqhupfix) with SMTP id 2B29E820241 for ; Sat, 09 Jul 2005 01:49:47 -0100 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:49:47 -0200 From: "Agnes Howard" To: Subject: Notification: We offer low rates X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.just1ces.net/signs.asp Best Regards, Glen Cameron to be remov(ed: http://www.just1ces.net/deletion.asp this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From capwap-admin@frascone.com Mon Jul 11 18:49:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Ds75K-0001IN-78 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:49:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28227 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:49:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E241D2041A; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:49:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F9E6202AD; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:49:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A32B202AD for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp4.centerbeam.com (smtp4.centerbeam.com [63.120.115.248]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7264720266 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cba0e2k00.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.25]) by smtp4.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:50:57 -0700 Received: from CBA0E2K06.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.40]) by cba0e2k00.CBA0.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:48:24 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=SHA1; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002C_01C58638.615295E0" Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes Thread-Topic: Negotiation of user data Termination Thread-Index: AcV9fda1yiVx9PtNQ/udOTBlx6WAbAI7BUqg From: "Darren Loher" To: "Michael Montemurro" , "James Kempf" , "Pat Calhoun" , "Sadot, Emek (Emek)" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jul 2005 22:48:24.0408 (UTC) FILETIME=[A5132D80:01C5866A] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: Negotiation of user data Termination Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:48:36 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C58638.615295E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Michael, Thanks for the response. However, I am still having a hard time finding a TLV or control message which refers to tunneling capabilities and wether or not they should be activated. Can you point out the sections in CTP where these are defined? It seems the tunnel capabilities should be in 5.3.1, but the capabilities listed are: MAC-CAP AUTH-CAP ENCRYPT-CAP Also, I believe there needs to be a mechanism for the AC to configure the WTP for tunnel operation. Section 5.3.3 seems to imply that such an action would occur here, but there is no definition of how. I can only infer that it might be via an SNMP OID embedded in the CTP Config-Req message? -Darren > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 8:09 AM > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > Subject: Negotiation of user data Termination > > Darren, > > In the CTP protocol, the WTP advertises its user data termination (WTP or > AC) capabilities to the AC during the connection process. > > The AC can configure the user data termination mode (local or AC) at the > WTP > on a logical network basis. For example, in a branch environment, you > could > configure a WTP to advertise a network that is bridged locally to the LAN > and a separate logical network that is tunnelled back through the WAN to > the > AC. > > The data termination mode negotiation is described in version 02 of the > draft. > > Cheers, > > Mike ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C58638.615295E0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIII3zCCAmcw ggHQoAMCAQICAw8USjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFADBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMGA1UEChMcVGhh d3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVt YWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EwHhcNMDUwNzA1MTgxMDUzWhcNMDYwNzA1MTgxMDUzWjBJMR8wHQYDVQQD ExZUaGF3dGUgRnJlZW1haWwgTWVtYmVyMSYwJAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhdkbG9oZXJAcm92aW5ncGxh bmV0LmNvbTCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAwgYkCgYEAuzQAKdK0RCb0UMiul+QEb1Ak2Z5W zRfSYFXRUuCF+q02rb/ErBZDL1uHZNaCcPiFSS2VYNnZk76p9U+AswSJqp8ZqrFcvb4cwaYLB9Hf 0fYOc66jKPdQ88km6q8gh9ITRteh6yHlLWSvQGzMpyIdxOWvmuImjJoodK7s2/UchkECAwEAAaNE MEIwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgSQMCIGA1UdEQQbMBmBF2Rsb2hlckByb3ZpbmdwbGFuZXQuY29tMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQADgYEAvxYJeel2RXVjzulFM1OE6E7bUz/aS1E2KD6L erDorpeW64766vPAIKYfKOS0Xp0Clos31Bblhrq+em6OyMd0oEsEPcoV7ZsVIrx1RqcHpBCVLSZi 0HmlhAW6ePCoywfT4tyghHlSK3p45mUX9pygFvSFDqcBNZdfN2aAjDRgTFMwggMtMIIClqADAgEC AgEAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMIHRMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTEVMBMGA1UECBMMV2VzdGVybiBDYXBl MRIwEAYDVQQHEwlDYXBlIFRvd24xGjAYBgNVBAoTEVRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nMSgwJgYDVQQL Ex9DZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFNlcnZpY2VzIERpdmlzaW9uMSQwIgYDVQQDExtUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29u YWwgRnJlZW1haWwgQ0ExKzApBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWHHBlcnNvbmFsLWZyZWVtYWlsQHRoYXd0ZS5j b20wHhcNOTYwMTAxMDAwMDAwWhcNMjAxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTATBgNV BAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUgQ29u c3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIGA1UE AxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25hbC1m cmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDUadfUsJRkW3Hp R9gMUbbqcpGwhF59LQ2PexLfhSV1KHQ6QixjJ5+Ve0vvfhmHHYbqo925zpZkGsIUbkSsfOaP6E0P cR9AOKYAo4d49vmUhl6t6sBeduvZFKNdbnp8DKVLVX8GGSl/npom1Wq7OCQIapjHsdqjmJH9edvl WsQcuQIDAQABoxMwETAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBAMfskn5O+PWW pWdiKqTwTRFg0G+NYFhhrCa7UjVcCM8w+6hKloofYkIjjBcP9LpknBesRynfnZhe0mxgcVyirNx5 4+duAEcftQ0o6AKd5Jr9E/Sm2Xyx+NxfIyYJkYBz0BQb3kOpgyXy5pwvFcr+pquKB3WLDN1RhGvk +NHOd6KBMIIDPzCCAqigAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTAT BgNVBAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUg Q29uc3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIG A1UEAxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25h bC1mcmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMB4XDTAzMDcxNzAwMDAwMFoXDTEzMDcxNjIzNTk1OVowYjEL MAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNV BAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUA A4GNADCBiQKBgQDEpjxVc1X7TrnKmVoeaMB1BHCd3+n/ox7svc31W/Iadr1/DDph8r9RzgHU5VAK MNcCY1osiRVwjt3J8CuFWqo/cVbLrzwLB+fxH5E2JCoTzyvV84J3PQO+K/67GD4Hv0CAAmTXp6a7 n2XRxSpUhQ9IBH+nttE8YQRAHmQZcmC3+wIDAQABo4GUMIGRMBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAw QwYDVR0fBDwwOjA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2NybC50aGF3dGUuY29tL1RoYXd0ZVBlcnNvbmFsRnJl ZW1haWxDQS5jcmwwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMCkGA1UdEQQiMCCkHjAcMRowGAYDVQQDExFQcml2YXRl TGFiZWwyLTEzODANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOBgQBIjNFQg+oLLswNo2asZw9/r6y+whehQ5aUnX9M Ibj4Nh+qLZ82L8D0HFAgk3A8/a3hYWLD2ToZfoSxmRsAxRoLgnSeJVCUYsfbJ3FXJY3dqZw5jowg T2Vfldr394fWxghOrvbqNOUQGls1TXfjViF4gtwhGTXeJLHTHUb/XV9lTzGCAZUwggGRAgEBMGkw YjELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAq BgNVBAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBAgMPFEowCQYFKw4DAhoF AKCBgzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNTA3MTEyMjQ4 MzVaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBRaHJLfY3RjU9+K3pUbPpsM3F5kXjAkBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xFzAV MAcGBSsOAwIaMAoGCCqGSIb3DQIFMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIGAi3zmkZ5TqVjnQEPLUby6Kvqn s6zgODp1eI0jG2J0c9XEImbp3IRd9RDEYAFOPfp1ye4y0pvQAVGIi+T3/3zE/Nq6xpDkcS3J0v15 QYrz7t+RKUS9SCwOgH0XvVGHNEjiS5lXku7BREByqXQ/flaWIozQJhwBbCLbAfYwcr3rdd0AAAAA AAA= ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C58638.615295E0-- _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From automne@doramail.com Mon Jul 11 23:52:25 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsBom-0004CD-Hp; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:52:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22556; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:52:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsCGt-0000cs-4I; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:21:28 -0400 Received: from 201009036064.user.veloxzone.com.br ([201.9.36.64]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1DsBod-0002s6-3o; Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:52:22 -0400 Received: from watery.hjjpmb.anent.stochastic.com by clerk.compassion.winkle.com (gshupfix) with SMTP id 3B29E820326 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 01:44:06 -0300 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:49:06 +0500 From: "Debra Mora" To: Subject: Super low mortage rate X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.stray-d0g.com/signs.asp Best Regards, Isiah Kendrick to be remov(ed: http://www.stray-d0g.com/deletion.asp this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From fnan@doramail.com Tue Jul 12 04:24:54 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsG4U-0006M8-CB; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:24:54 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00585; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:24:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [205.242.37.52] (helo=h52.intermind.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsGWd-0001FF-Qf; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:54:00 -0400 Received: from permitted-cihp.pryk.net (HELO adele-qedx.net) by splenetic-ext.aazib.net (8.9.0) with ESMTP id GEY12vavc; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 03:12:30 -0600 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 07:12:30 -0200 From: "Brandy Webb" Message-ID: <181.44e558d5.2a9BKF44@wea.com> To: bridge-mib@ietf.org Cc: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org, business@ietf.org, capwap-archive@ietf.org, cclark@ietf.org, cdi-archive@ietf.org, cfrg@ietf.org, cfrg-admin@ietf.org, cfrg-archive@ietf.org Subject: Low mortage rate accepted X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.0.28] X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.stray-d0g.com/signs.asp Best Regards, Dorthy Chamberlain to be remov(ed: http://www.stray-d0g.com/deletion.asp this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From 675evan@about.com Tue Jul 12 08:05:05 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsJVZ-0006b2-59 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:05:05 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA15077 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:05:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DsJxk-00014s-BE for capwap-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:34:13 -0400 Received: from pcp08942674pcs.trentn01.nj.comcast.net ([69.141.174.7]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1DsJVO-00087p-Bk for capwap-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:04:58 -0400 Message-ID: <4c8b01c586d7$ca94e41f$98f89281@about.com> From: "Vanessa J. Smith" <675evan@about.com> To: capwap-archive@ietf.org Subject: Cheap software Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:49:49 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_054F5FD4.65E2C238" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express V6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 3002fc2e661cd7f114cb6bae92fe88f1 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_054F5FD4.65E2C238 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0001_09EEFD94.175325B2" ------=_NextPart_001_0001_09EEFD94.175325B2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Get access to all the software you ever imagined for wholesale prices! Our software is 2-10 times cheaper than sold by our competitors. Just a few examples: $79.95 Windows XP Professional (Including: Service Pack 2) $89.95 Microsoft Office 2003 Professional / $79.95 Office XP Professional $99.95 Adobe Photoshop 8.0/CS (Including: ImageReady CS) $179.95 Macromedia Studio MX 2004 (Including: Dreamweaver MX + Flash MX + Fireworks MX) $79.95 Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional $69.95 MS Project 2003 Professional Special Offers: $89.95 Windows XP Professional + Office XP Professional $149.95 Adobe Creative Suite Premium (5 CD) $129.95 Adobe Photoshop 7 + Adobe Premiere 7 + Adobe Illustrator 10 All main products from Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia, Corel, etc. And many other... To visit us go: http://www.soft-paradise.com Sincerely, Vanessa Smith _____________________________________________________ To change your mail details, go here _____________________________________________________ ------=_NextPart_001_0001_09EEFD94.175325B2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Get access to all the software you ever imagined for wholesale prices!
Our software is 2-10 times cheaper than sold by our competitors.

Just a few examples:
$79.95 Windows XP Professional (Including: Service Pack 2)
$89.95 Microsoft Office 2003 Professional / $79.95 Office XP Professional
$99.95 Adobe Photoshop 8.0/CS (Including: ImageReady CS)
$179.95 Macromedia Studio MX 2004 (Including: Dreamweaver MX + Flash MX + Fireworks MX)
$79.95 Adobe Acrobat 6.0 Professional
$69.95 MS Project 2003 Professional

Special Offers:
$89.95 Windows XP Professional + Office XP Professional
$149.95 Adobe Creative Suite Premium (5 CD)
$129.95 Adobe Photoshop 7 + Adobe Premiere 7 + Adobe Illustrator 10

All main products from Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia, Corel, etc.
And many other... To visit us go:

http://www.soft-paradise.com

Sincerely,
Vanessa Smith


_____________________________________________________
To change your mail details, go here
_____________________________________________________

------=_NextPart_001_0001_09EEFD94.175325B2-- ------=_NextPart_000_0000_054F5FD4.65E2C238-- From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 12 15:06:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsQ53-0007ZX-V7 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:06:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA24716 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593222041A; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:06:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DCEB2036B; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:06:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64C62036B for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:05:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext02.nokia.com (mgw-ext02.nokia.com [131.228.20.94]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A82120266 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:05:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext02.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j6CJ3JYs004760; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:03:24 +0300 Received: from daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.111]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:03:23 +0300 Received: from mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.64.23]) by daebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 14:03:20 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <893AE265F4ADF94AB7FB26D31A788E410C123D@mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com> Thread-Topic: IETF 63 CAPWAP WG Agenda Thread-Index: AcWHFFwE9kCuzt3cT8iYqGYeoFq7Yw== From: To: Cc: , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2005 19:03:20.0470 (UTC) FILETIME=[5E838360:01C58714] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] IETF 63 CAPWAP WG Agenda Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:03:19 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is a draft agenda that has been proposed to the Chairs that shows = CAPWAP WG scheduled on Monday, August 1st, from 14:00 - 16:00. At this = point its possible the schedule may change. We also like to propose the following agenda. We are tight on time, but = if there are other request let us know and we will do what we can. 0. Agenda bashing, WG status & Milestones - 5 min 1. Dorothy Stanley IEEE liaison report - 5 min 2. Objectives Draft Update: 10 min 3. Evaluation Team summary: 30 min 4. Protocol Summary & Update=20 CTP - 15 min. LWAPP - 15 min. SLAPP - 15 min. WiCOP - 15 min. In addition to the protocol and self-evaluation drafts, this presentation is intended as a clear summary & highlights - especially=20 clarifying recent changes made to the protocol drafts to help WG review this against evaluation team's assessments (to come later). 5. CAPWAP Taxonomy Recommendation draft - 10 min =20 _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 12 15:59:19 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsQuQ-0002um-Jr for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:59:19 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA00537 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:59:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FAF2043D; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:59:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2393A20365; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:59:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2690820365 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:58:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from typhoon.trangosoft.com (unknown [209.82.51.154]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 354AE202A3 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:58:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phantom-out.trangosoft.com ([136.157.233.22]) by 136.157.233.32 with trend_isnt_name_B; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:58:01 -0400 Received: from troll3.trangosoft.com (troll3.trangosoft.com [136.157.233.13]) by phantom-out.trangosoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB7BB24FA8; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:32:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by troll3.trangosoft.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:52:07 -0400 Message-ID: <1652EBA28502ED4393B9BC9B8A4B60131A4790@mism121a.toronto.chantrynetworks.com> From: Michael Montemurro To: Darren Loher , James Kempf , Pat Calhoun , "Sadot, Emek (Emek)" , capwap@frascone.com, isingh@chantrynetworks.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: Negotiation of user data Termination Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:56:25 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Darren, Thanks for pointing that out. I think we need to clarify the tunnelling behavior more clearly in the text of our draft. We do send an OID down in the configuration, inside the CTP Config-Resp message, that tells the WTP to tunnel traffic or bridge locally. It allows us to configure the tunnelling option on the WTP on logical network basis. For instance in a branch scenario, you may want to configure a poliy for the WTP to bridge traffic locally for one network, but tunnel traffic to the controller for another network. Cheers, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Darren Loher [mailto:DLoher@rovingplanet.com] > Sent: July 11, 2005 6:49 PM > To: Michael Montemurro; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek > (Emek); capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > Hi Michael, > > Thanks for the response. However, I am still having a hard > time finding a TLV or control message which refers to > tunneling capabilities and wether or not they should be > activated. Can you point out the sections in CTP where these > are defined? > > It seems the tunnel capabilities should be in 5.3.1, but the > capabilities listed are: > MAC-CAP > AUTH-CAP > ENCRYPT-CAP > > Also, I believe there needs to be a mechanism for the AC to > configure the WTP for tunnel operation. Section 5.3.3 seems > to imply that such an action would occur here, but there is > no definition of how. I can only infer that it might be via > an SNMP OID embedded in the CTP Config-Req message? > > -Darren > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 8:09 AM > > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > Subject: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > Darren, > > > > In the CTP protocol, the WTP advertises its user data > termination (WTP > > or > > AC) capabilities to the AC during the connection process. > > > > The AC can configure the user data termination mode (local > or AC) at > > the WTP on a logical network basis. For example, in a branch > > environment, you could configure a WTP to advertise a > network that is > > bridged locally to the LAN and a separate logical network that is > > tunnelled back through the WAN to the AC. > > > > The data termination mode negotiation is described in version 02 of > > the draft. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mike > _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 12 16:07:13 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DsR28-0007pb-8g for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:07:13 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA04091 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:07:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C72852041D; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:07:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB142036F; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:07:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E6120365 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:06:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp4.centerbeam.com (smtp4.centerbeam.com [63.120.115.248]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C799202A3 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:06:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from CBA0E2K01.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.24]) by smtp4.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:08:50 -0700 Received: from CBA0E2K06.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.40]) by CBA0E2K01.CBA0.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:06:15 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=SHA1; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0097_01C586EA.E2541E40" Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes Thread-Topic: Negotiation of user data Termination Thread-Index: AcWHHBL5UMkftEhyTU+JuTO/IT0gcwAAKWow From: "Darren Loher" To: "Michael Montemurro" , "James Kempf" , "Pat Calhoun" , "Sadot, Emek (Emek)" , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jul 2005 20:06:15.0270 (UTC) FILETIME=[28784860:01C5871D] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: Negotiation of user data Termination Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:06:23 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0097_01C586EA.E2541E40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Mike, I believe CTP's approach of using SNMP requires that CTP also publish a minimum standard MIB. The reason is there are a couple of mandatory CAPWAP functions which CTP implements via OID's. To ensure interoperability, CTP needs to publish at least the minimum OID's. (such as tunnel configuration control) > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:56 PM > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > Darren, > > Thanks for pointing that out. I think we need to clarify the tunnelling > behavior more clearly in the text of our draft. > > We do send an OID down in the configuration, inside the CTP Config-Resp > message, that tells the WTP to tunnel traffic or bridge locally. It allows > us to configure the tunnelling option on the WTP on logical network basis. > For instance in a branch scenario, you may want to configure a poliy for > the > WTP to bridge traffic locally for one network, but tunnel traffic to the > controller for another network. > > Cheers, > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Darren Loher [mailto:DLoher@rovingplanet.com] > > Sent: July 11, 2005 6:49 PM > > To: Michael Montemurro; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek > > (Emek); capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > Thanks for the response. However, I am still having a hard > > time finding a TLV or control message which refers to > > tunneling capabilities and wether or not they should be > > activated. Can you point out the sections in CTP where these > > are defined? > > > > It seems the tunnel capabilities should be in 5.3.1, but the > > capabilities listed are: > > MAC-CAP > > AUTH-CAP > > ENCRYPT-CAP > > > > Also, I believe there needs to be a mechanism for the AC to > > configure the WTP for tunnel operation. Section 5.3.3 seems > > to imply that such an action would occur here, but there is > > no definition of how. I can only infer that it might be via > > an SNMP OID embedded in the CTP Config-Req message? > > > > -Darren > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 8:09 AM > > > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > > > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > > Subject: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > > > Darren, > > > > > > In the CTP protocol, the WTP advertises its user data > > termination (WTP > > > or > > > AC) capabilities to the AC during the connection process. > > > > > > The AC can configure the user data termination mode (local > > or AC) at > > > the WTP on a logical network basis. For example, in a branch > > > environment, you could configure a WTP to advertise a > > network that is > > > bridged locally to the LAN and a separate logical network that is > > > tunnelled back through the WAN to the AC. > > > > > > The data termination mode negotiation is described in version 02 of > > > the draft. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Mike > > ------=_NextPart_000_0097_01C586EA.E2541E40 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIII3zCCAmcw ggHQoAMCAQICAw8USjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFADBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMGA1UEChMcVGhh d3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVt YWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EwHhcNMDUwNzA1MTgxMDUzWhcNMDYwNzA1MTgxMDUzWjBJMR8wHQYDVQQD ExZUaGF3dGUgRnJlZW1haWwgTWVtYmVyMSYwJAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhdkbG9oZXJAcm92aW5ncGxh bmV0LmNvbTCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAwgYkCgYEAuzQAKdK0RCb0UMiul+QEb1Ak2Z5W zRfSYFXRUuCF+q02rb/ErBZDL1uHZNaCcPiFSS2VYNnZk76p9U+AswSJqp8ZqrFcvb4cwaYLB9Hf 0fYOc66jKPdQ88km6q8gh9ITRteh6yHlLWSvQGzMpyIdxOWvmuImjJoodK7s2/UchkECAwEAAaNE MEIwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgSQMCIGA1UdEQQbMBmBF2Rsb2hlckByb3ZpbmdwbGFuZXQuY29tMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQADgYEAvxYJeel2RXVjzulFM1OE6E7bUz/aS1E2KD6L erDorpeW64766vPAIKYfKOS0Xp0Clos31Bblhrq+em6OyMd0oEsEPcoV7ZsVIrx1RqcHpBCVLSZi 0HmlhAW6ePCoywfT4tyghHlSK3p45mUX9pygFvSFDqcBNZdfN2aAjDRgTFMwggMtMIIClqADAgEC AgEAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMIHRMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTEVMBMGA1UECBMMV2VzdGVybiBDYXBl MRIwEAYDVQQHEwlDYXBlIFRvd24xGjAYBgNVBAoTEVRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nMSgwJgYDVQQL Ex9DZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFNlcnZpY2VzIERpdmlzaW9uMSQwIgYDVQQDExtUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29u YWwgRnJlZW1haWwgQ0ExKzApBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWHHBlcnNvbmFsLWZyZWVtYWlsQHRoYXd0ZS5j b20wHhcNOTYwMTAxMDAwMDAwWhcNMjAxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTATBgNV BAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUgQ29u c3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIGA1UE AxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25hbC1m cmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDUadfUsJRkW3Hp R9gMUbbqcpGwhF59LQ2PexLfhSV1KHQ6QixjJ5+Ve0vvfhmHHYbqo925zpZkGsIUbkSsfOaP6E0P cR9AOKYAo4d49vmUhl6t6sBeduvZFKNdbnp8DKVLVX8GGSl/npom1Wq7OCQIapjHsdqjmJH9edvl WsQcuQIDAQABoxMwETAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBAMfskn5O+PWW pWdiKqTwTRFg0G+NYFhhrCa7UjVcCM8w+6hKloofYkIjjBcP9LpknBesRynfnZhe0mxgcVyirNx5 4+duAEcftQ0o6AKd5Jr9E/Sm2Xyx+NxfIyYJkYBz0BQb3kOpgyXy5pwvFcr+pquKB3WLDN1RhGvk +NHOd6KBMIIDPzCCAqigAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTAT BgNVBAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUg Q29uc3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIG A1UEAxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25h bC1mcmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMB4XDTAzMDcxNzAwMDAwMFoXDTEzMDcxNjIzNTk1OVowYjEL MAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNV BAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUA A4GNADCBiQKBgQDEpjxVc1X7TrnKmVoeaMB1BHCd3+n/ox7svc31W/Iadr1/DDph8r9RzgHU5VAK MNcCY1osiRVwjt3J8CuFWqo/cVbLrzwLB+fxH5E2JCoTzyvV84J3PQO+K/67GD4Hv0CAAmTXp6a7 n2XRxSpUhQ9IBH+nttE8YQRAHmQZcmC3+wIDAQABo4GUMIGRMBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAw QwYDVR0fBDwwOjA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2NybC50aGF3dGUuY29tL1RoYXd0ZVBlcnNvbmFsRnJl ZW1haWxDQS5jcmwwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMCkGA1UdEQQiMCCkHjAcMRowGAYDVQQDExFQcml2YXRl TGFiZWwyLTEzODANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOBgQBIjNFQg+oLLswNo2asZw9/r6y+whehQ5aUnX9M Ibj4Nh+qLZ82L8D0HFAgk3A8/a3hYWLD2ToZfoSxmRsAxRoLgnSeJVCUYsfbJ3FXJY3dqZw5jowg T2Vfldr394fWxghOrvbqNOUQGls1TXfjViF4gtwhGTXeJLHTHUb/XV9lTzGCAZUwggGRAgEBMGkw YjELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAq BgNVBAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBAgMPFEowCQYFKw4DAhoF AKCBgzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNTA3MTIyMDA2 MjJaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBTMTv+q015sec3z7F5qgmjM6vHbnjAkBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xFzAV MAcGBSsOAwIaMAoGCCqGSIb3DQIFMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIGAB5hlwmutKe2B9zAEv2zHpJF2 UM8y1WK0DsDA+r0SwnADtNLYMjSxPa5iEdVk65VHPCqL1T93V/Iz9P8UrikyamB3XS5WpfKj0Z2u AqbIpIc5WiCcfwiEzRp+DLtCjAyyhHvy4DhPBN01gnzbU9u3MNX9Bpt9zxdEpt441Cpz8ucAAAAA AAA= ------=_NextPart_000_0097_01C586EA.E2541E40-- _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 13 08:53:14 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dsgjc-0004zV-RW for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:53:14 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA03361 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:53:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B94E204A4; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:53:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE9DA20472; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:53:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB4F20472 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from typhoon.trangosoft.com (unknown [209.82.51.154]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 077F51FC24 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:52:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phantom-out.trangosoft.com ([136.157.233.22]) by 136.157.233.32 with trend_isnt_name_B; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:52:26 -0400 Received: from troll3.trangosoft.com (troll3.trangosoft.com [136.157.233.13]) by phantom-out.trangosoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A98F24FAC; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:26:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: by troll3.trangosoft.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:46:32 -0400 Message-ID: <1652EBA28502ED4393B9BC9B8A4B60131E12EE@mism121a.toronto.chantrynetworks.com> From: Michael Montemurro To: Darren Loher , James Kempf , Pat Calhoun , "Sadot, Emek (Emek)" , capwap@frascone.com, isingh@chantrynetworks.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: Negotiation of user data Termination Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 08:50:45 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Darren, You are correct. We will update that information the next time we update the CTP draft. Thanks, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: Darren Loher [mailto:DLoher@rovingplanet.com] > Sent: July 12, 2005 4:06 PM > To: Michael Montemurro; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek > (Emek); capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > Hi Mike, > > I believe CTP's approach of using SNMP requires that CTP also > publish a minimum standard MIB. The reason is there are a > couple of mandatory CAPWAP > functions which CTP implements via OID's. To ensure > interoperability, CTP > needs to publish at least the minimum OID's. (such as tunnel > configuration > control) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:56 PM > > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > Darren, > > > > Thanks for pointing that out. I think we need to clarify the > > tunnelling behavior more clearly in the text of our draft. > > > > We do send an OID down in the configuration, inside the CTP > > Config-Resp message, that tells the WTP to tunnel traffic or bridge > > locally. It allows us to configure the tunnelling option on > the WTP on logical network basis. > > For instance in a branch scenario, you may want to > configure a poliy > > for the WTP to bridge traffic locally for one network, but tunnel > > traffic to the controller for another network. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Darren Loher [mailto:DLoher@rovingplanet.com] > > > Sent: July 11, 2005 6:49 PM > > > To: Michael Montemurro; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek > > > (Emek); capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > > Subject: RE: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > > > Thanks for the response. However, I am still having a hard time > > > finding a TLV or control message which refers to tunneling > > > capabilities and wether or not they should be activated. Can you > > > point out the sections in CTP where these are defined? > > > > > > It seems the tunnel capabilities should be in 5.3.1, but the > > > capabilities listed are: > > > MAC-CAP > > > AUTH-CAP > > > ENCRYPT-CAP > > > > > > Also, I believe there needs to be a mechanism for the AC to > > > configure the WTP for tunnel operation. Section 5.3.3 seems to > > > imply that such an action would occur here, but there is no > > > definition of how. I can only infer that it might be via an SNMP > > > OID embedded in the CTP Config-Req message? > > > > > > -Darren > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Michael Montemurro [mailto:michael.montemurro@siemens.com] > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 8:09 AM > > > > To: Darren Loher; James Kempf; Pat Calhoun; Sadot, Emek (Emek); > > > > capwap@frascone.com; isingh@chantrynetworks.com > > > > Subject: Negotiation of user data Termination > > > > > > > > Darren, > > > > > > > > In the CTP protocol, the WTP advertises its user data > > > termination (WTP > > > > or > > > > AC) capabilities to the AC during the connection process. > > > > > > > > The AC can configure the user data termination mode (local > > > or AC) at > > > > the WTP on a logical network basis. For example, in a branch > > > > environment, you could configure a WTP to advertise a > > > network that is > > > > bridged locally to the LAN and a separate logical > network that is > > > > tunnelled back through the WAN to the AC. > > > > > > > > The data termination mode negotiation is described in > version 02 > > > > of the draft. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 13 09:30:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DshJR-0007MM-QE for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:30:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA06417 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:30:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948CA204A5; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:30:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0202020472; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:30:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0C8620278 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:19:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (staff-mail.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C7A41FD6C for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:19:49 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943A4@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP thread-index: AcWG7MX+3/5cug+xT3uNlbwBYk7ZSg== From: "Richard Gwee" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:19:54 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I will like to ask a question regarding the Add Blacklist Entry. From my = understanding on the LWAPP IETF draft, every WTP should kept a copy of = the blacklist of MAC addresses that it should not provide service to. I = will like to know the criteria on which a MAC address is being = blacklisted. =20 Is the blacklist mechanism used mainly to keep out rogue MAC addresses = or mainly to blacklist MAC addresses that have failed to respond during = discovery phase? In the event that if an AC is down due to power = shutdown etc, how will this blacklist be updated? =20 Appreciate some enlightenment.=20 =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning to fully = adopt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has scored another first by = achieving the People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year of our = operation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 13 13:18:08 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dsks4-0004pn-4I for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:18:08 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04851 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA25204C0; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A647E204A5; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:18:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A962D204A5 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:17:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.204]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98531204A4 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:17:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i2so234228wra for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:17:19 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=cgW0HDSS2+E30WnL/sYA0KvTqEo1op5xuXNJv6iv9raGbq20UlOeINHYQUgyoGpGhZeOnigExa4ZTpBGoKdIrzO20tj/XMqh+kocqUbz1UxWcspAEONM4N2MkEL2ilZw2hfrxuO/NmAaPgIObBiGNF5kMHt50P1X0d/gXB2LuO8= Received: by 10.54.47.67 with SMTP id u67mr370903wru; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.81.10 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: From: Clint Chaplin Reply-To: Clint Chaplin To: Richard Gwee Subject: Re: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP Cc: capwap@frascone.com In-Reply-To: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943A4@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943A4@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:16:31 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My opinion is that the criteria for placing devices on the blacklist is complety beyond the scope of this group. The criteria should be something that is specified by the company/person who is installing CAPWAP devices, and should not be standardized. On 7/12/05, Richard Gwee wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I will like to ask a question regarding the Add Blacklist Entry. From my = understanding on the LWAPP IETF draft, every WTP should kept a copy of the = blacklist of MAC addresses that it should not provide service to. I will li= ke to know the criteria on which a MAC address is being blacklisted. >=20 > Is the blacklist mechanism used mainly to keep out rogue MAC addresses or= mainly to blacklist MAC addresses that have failed to respond during disco= very phase? In the event that if an AC is down due to power shutdown etc, h= ow will this blacklist be updated? >=20 > Appreciate some enlightenment. >=20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee >=20 >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning to fully ado= pt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has scored another first by achievi= ng the People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year of our operat= ion. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of the= individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains information that= is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of this message, are no= t the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy th= is communication. If you have received this communication in error, please = notify us immediately by return email and delete the original message. Than= k you. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap >=20 --=20 Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin Wireless Security Technologist Wireless Standards Manager _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 13 16:34:14 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dsnvl-0003KU-0m for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:34:14 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA03636 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:34:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF87B204C0; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:34:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B046204A5; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:34:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBA8204A5 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:33:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from fridge.docomolabs-usa.com (key1.docomolabs-usa.com [216.98.102.225]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C84020453 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:33:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <0a0c01c587ea$217eeaf0$016115ac@dcml.docomolabsusa.com> From: "James Kempf" To: "Clint Chaplin" , "Richard Gwee" Cc: References: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943A4@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Subject: Re: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:33:30 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agree, it is a policy issue. jak ----- Original Message ----- From: "Clint Chaplin" To: "Richard Gwee" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP My opinion is that the criteria for placing devices on the blacklist is complety beyond the scope of this group. The criteria should be something that is specified by the company/person who is installing CAPWAP devices, and should not be standardized. On 7/12/05, Richard Gwee wrote: > Hi, > > I will like to ask a question regarding the Add Blacklist Entry. From my understanding on the LWAPP IETF draft, every WTP should kept a copy of the blacklist of MAC addresses that it should not provide service to. I will like to know the criteria on which a MAC address is being blacklisted. > > Is the blacklist mechanism used mainly to keep out rogue MAC addresses or mainly to blacklist MAC addresses that have failed to respond during discovery phase? In the event that if an AC is down due to power shutdown etc, how will this blacklist be updated? > > Appreciate some enlightenment. > > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee > > > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . > > Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning to fully adopt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has scored another first by achieving the People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year of our operation. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email and delete the original message. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > -- Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin Wireless Security Technologist Wireless Standards Manager _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From manoff@doramail.com Thu Jul 14 06:05:47 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dt0bD-0003SB-SS; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:05:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA25822; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:05:43 -0400 (EDT) From: manoff@doramail.com Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dt13l-0002gj-C8; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:35:18 -0400 Received: from user-12lcotp.cable.mindspring.com ([69.86.99.185]) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Dt0b8-0004TK-7F; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:05:43 -0400 Received: from UNZJVuzcc.com (EHLO aafwv-a.maternal.XY.uln.net) roof by mail.mtk.nao.ac.jp (5.3[2 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:05:43 -0400 X-Spam-Score: 4.0 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2eba37fe9c77781b0ecb0a74d8c65128 From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 19 15:01:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DuxL4-0002kn-1P for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA23049 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B1F31FFF2; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A06C1FE0E; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12EE31FC5F for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D45901FC5D for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:00:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Jul 2005 12:00:03 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6JIxLW9005196 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:00:01 -0700 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Subject: RE: [Capwap] Taxonomy Recommendations Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A26806F3@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Taxonomy Recommendations Thread-Index: AcVtOhnDF7wSogXjSc25RD55TDTCAAEI74SwBs0pGVA= From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jul 2005 19:00:01.0894 (UTC) FILETIME=[110B7860:01C58C94] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 11:59:34 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All, I wanted to inform the Working Group that Inderpreet, Bob and I have been working on the taxonomy recommendations document and submitted a revision (-01) late last week to the I-D editor.=20 This version basically introduces two new sections; 5 and 6. Following on the previous version, section 5 goes into greater detail about Local MAC architectures, and some of the motivations for creating such a product. This section comes to the conclusion that although Local and Split are different, there is a way to design a common protocol for both, and provides a recommended approach for doing so. Section 6 discusses the complex topic of options and negotiation. We've had many discussions both in this forum, and in the actual protocol drafts, about providing multiple options in the protocol. This section gets into the issues related to having multiple optional features, how it impacts interoperability, etc. The section attempts to list a small number of optional features that we are proposing be supported, and default (mandatory to implement) modes, which the WG would have to agree with. The conclusion section was modified to encompass the new sections. Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com=20 > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Pat Calhoun > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 5:17 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] Taxonomy Recommendations >=20 > All, >=20 > I wanted to follow up on the draft that was sent last week,=20 > and explain some of the justification for this draft.=20 >=20 > When Inderpreet (co-author of the CAPWAP CTP submission), Bob=20 > O'Hara and I (co-authors of the CAPWAP LWAPP submission)=20 > discussed the differences between our respective approaches,=20 > it became clear that we did not have agreement on the=20 > definitions of Local and Split MAC. In re-reading the=20 > taxonomy specification, it became clear that while the=20 > taxonomy document lists the various approaches surveyed, it=20 > really did not provide a conclusion or recommendation.=20 > Therefore, the reader is left with no clear understanding the=20 > CAPWAP Working Group's definition of these two approaches. >=20 > For instance, by following the letter of the taxonomy=20 > specification, one will observe that the split in=20 > functionality varies greatly from one implementation of Local=20 > MAC to another. The following is figure 9, taken directly=20 > from the document: >=20 > Arch7 Arch8 Arch9 Arch10 Arch11 > ----- ----- ----- ------ ------ >=20 > Distribution > Service AC AC WTP AC WTP >=20 > Integration > Service WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Beacon > Generation WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Probe > Response WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Power mgmt > Packet > Buffering WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Fragmentation/ > Defragment. WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Association > Disassoc. > Reassociation AC WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > WME/11e > -------------- > classifying AC WTP >=20 > scheduling WTP AC/WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > queuing WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Authentication > and Privacy > -------------- > 802.1x/EAP AC AC AC/WTP AC AC/WTP >=20 > Keys > Management AC AC WTP AC AC >=20 > 802.11 > Encryption/ > Decryption WTP WTP WTP WTP WTP >=20 > Figure 9: Mapping of 802.11 Functions for Local MAC Architecture >=20 > Finally, the secion on Local MAC concludes with the following text: >=20 > From Figure 7, Figure 8 and Figure 9, it is clear that differences > among vendors in the Local MAC Architecture are relatively=20 > minor, and > most of the functional mapping appears to be common across vendors. >=20 > The issue with the above paragraph is that while the=20 > differences are restricted to specific functions (e.g.,=20 > Distribution Service), these small differences will=20 > significantly change how products operate. In the case of=20 > Distribution Service, it will state whether traffic is=20 > tunneled to/from the WTP or not. >=20 > Given the above, Inderpreet, Bob and I collaborated together=20 > in order to come to some agreement on what the differences=20 > between both approaches were. > I think that the results of our extensive conversations=20 > resulted in the previously mentioned draft. I would urge the=20 > WG to take a look at this document and provide comments. At a=20 > minimum, we believe it would be in the best interest of the=20 > working group to at least discuss whether the taxonomy=20 > document is in need of some conclusions in order to set a=20 > frame of reference in the two main approaches. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Pat Calhoun > CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit > Cisco Systems >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com > > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Pat Calhoun > > Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 2:28 PM > > To: capwap@frascone.com > > Subject: [Capwap] Taxonomy Recommendations > >=20 > > All, > > =20 > > I wanted to announce the early availability of the CAPWAP taxonomy=20 > > recommendation draft that Bob O'Hara Inderpreet Singh and I=20 > have been=20 > > working on. It can be found at=20 > > http://www.capwap.org/draft-calhoun-capwap-taxonomy-recommenda > > tion-00.txt. > >=20 > >=20 > > Abstract > >=20 > > The IETF's CAPWAP working group has documented various product > > architectures and has categorized the Centralized WLAN=20 > > Architectures > > into two main buckets: Split and Local MAC. While the document > > contains very relevant and useful information, what it=20 > does is list > > the architectural variants of these two buckets, but does not > > unambiguously define either the Split MAC or Local MAC=20 > > architectures. > > In order for CAPWAP to be successful, it is crucial for the=20 > > protocol > > evaluation team, and the working group, to agree on unambiguous > > terminology to describe these architectures. > >=20 > > This document proposes terminology to unambiguously describe the > > relevant architectures found in the taxonomy document, for the > > purpose of initiating a discussion within the working=20 > group and to > > allow the protocol evaluation work to come to a fruitful=20 > > conclusion. > > We conclude in this document that the architectures are very=20 > > similar > > and could be supported via a single protocol. > >=20 > > Pat Calhoun > > CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Capwap mailing list > > Capwap@frascone.com > > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 19 15:02:08 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DuxLz-0002u1-TT for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:02:08 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA23100 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B3E20254; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33B251FC5F; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:02:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C071FC5F for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5461FC5D for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:01:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Jul 2005 12:01:00 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6JJ0sod004042; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:00:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:00:47 -0700 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Subject: RE: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A26806F5@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP Thread-Index: AcWG7MX+3/5cug+xT3uNlbwBYk7ZSgFpFJrA From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Richard Gwee" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jul 2005 19:00:47.0540 (UTC) FILETIME=[2C407F40:01C58C94] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 12:00:45 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My apologies for not responding earlier. The WTP only needs to keep track of the blacklist if it is operating in Local MAC mode. For split MAC, all blacklist enforcement can be done on the AC. The policies by which a MAC address is added to a blacklist is outside the scope of the document. Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com=20 > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 7:20 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: [Capwap] Question on the Blacklist on LWAPP >=20 > Hi, > =20 > I will like to ask a question regarding the Add Blacklist=20 > Entry. From my understanding on the LWAPP IETF draft, every=20 > WTP should kept a copy of the blacklist of MAC addresses that=20 > it should not provide service to. I will like to know the=20 > criteria on which a MAC address is being blacklisted. > =20 > Is the blacklist mechanism used mainly to keep out rogue MAC=20 > addresses or mainly to blacklist MAC addresses that have=20 > failed to respond during discovery phase? In the event that=20 > if an AC is down due to power shutdown etc, how will this=20 > blacklist be updated? > =20 > Appreciate some enlightenment.=20 > =20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee >=20 >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road,=20 > Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning=20 > to fully adopt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has=20 > scored another first by achieving the People Developer=20 > Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year=20 > of our operation. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for=20 > the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed=20 > and contains information that is privileged and confidential.=20 > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended=20 > recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy=20 > this communication. If you have received this communication=20 > in error, please notify us immediately by return email and=20 > delete the original message. Thank you. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 19 22:04:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dv3wP-0002vm-Gr for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:04:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA02884 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:04:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ABD620369; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:04:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C991FDE9; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:04:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C971FDE9 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:03:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (staff-mail.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE881FC7B for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2005 22:03:29 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943AC@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: Question on SLAPP discover request payload thread-index: AcWMzzrJN31wiehuQC6nSji0MlTGVw== From: "Richard Gwee" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Question on SLAPP discover request payload Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:03:32 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I have a question on the SLAPP discover request payload. In the draft, = the SLAPP discover request packet contains HW version information. What = is the rationale for this HW version to be present and how can this HW = version information actually benefit the CAPWAP protocol? If the WTP and = AC are from different vendors, do they need to recognise each other's HW = version? From my perspective, i thought that this seem to suggest a form = of dependency between the protocol performance and hardware. =20 Appreciate any enlightenments. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning to fully = adopt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has scored another first by = achieving the People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year of our = operation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From Nolden@luso.pt Wed Jul 20 09:31:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvEfI-0005MP-1T; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:31:12 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA14527; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [201.254.175.247] (helo=ieg.com.br) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DvF94-0002Fj-Nf; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:02:02 -0400 From: "Bryan Lori" To: "Fargo Leo" Subject: Re[6]: question with her tablets Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:31:09 +0300 Message-ID: <4d8b01c58d2f$0d8b094c$54007977@ieg.com.br> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_4567_89ABCDEF.01234567" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 32a65c0bf5eb4ec26489239c7cdd0636 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_4567_89ABCDEF.01234567 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ------=_NextPart_000_4567_89ABCDEF.01234567 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
GE RI IA S
NE C C LI
  
  
 

Boo ur se er
st yo xual Pow
Inc se yo su
rea ur Plea re
Hav rful Er ons
e Powe ecti
O DE !
R R

 

































ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con ------=_NextPart_000_4567_89ABCDEF.01234567-- From jedge@fadmail.com Wed Jul 20 15:10:37 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvJxl-000302-03; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:10:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21925; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:10:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [218.51.98.251] (helo=HOUSE-ZTNZICV0B) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DvKRY-0001u3-2i; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:41:26 -0400 Received: from exultant.kehiee.teleconference.clamp.com by jar.betroth.both.com (ythupfix) with SMTP id 5B29E820313 for ; Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:08:24 -0600 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:06:24 -0200 From: "Myra Blanton" To: Subject: Just approved mortage rate X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.discounted-rates.com/i/LzMvaW5kZXgvaW5rL3ZnczJ0 Best Regards, Pat Cortes to be remov(ed: http://www.discounted-rates.com/i/LzMvaW5kZXgvaW5rL3ZnczJ0 this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From hagerman@doramail.com Thu Jul 21 18:05:17 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvjAL-0006Vo-6m; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:05:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA17268; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:05:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DvjeR-0003U9-HD; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:36:24 -0400 Received: from [72.16.120.149] (helo=ip-72-16-120-149.valornet.com) by mx2.foretec.com with smtp (Exim 4.24) id 1DvjAJ-0001lM-5t; Thu, 21 Jul 2005 18:05:15 -0400 Received: from mud.nrrxvj.metallurgist.oceanic.com by saucy.shin.detoxify.com (hfhupfix) with SMTP id 9B29E820842 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 03:53:46 +0500 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:57:46 -0300 From: "Alice Suarez" To: Subject: Low mortage rate accepted X-Mailer: KYX CP/M FNORD 5602 X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a Hello, We tried contacting you awhile ago about your low interest morta(ge rate. You have been selected for our lowest rate in years... You could get over $420,000 for as little as $400 a month! Ba(d credit, Bank*ruptcy? Doesn't matter, low rates are fixed no matter what! To get a free, no obli,gation consultation click below: http://www.123m0rtgages.com/i/LzMvaW5kZXgvaW5rLzc1eno5OHB4dHFldDhtcHdzcTQy Best Regards, Delmer Lee to be remov(ed: http://www.123m0rtgages.com/i/LzMvaW5kZXgvaW5rLzc1eno5OHB4dHFldDhtcHdzcTQy this process takes one week, so please be patient. we do our best to take your email/s off but you have to fill out a rem/ove or else you will continue to recieve email/s. From capwap-admin@frascone.com Fri Jul 22 10:18:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvyLs-00054n-Pw for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:18:12 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18871 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:18:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0B6520533; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:18:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9296820392; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:18:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3729920392 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from twoface.cisco.frascone.com (sj-natpool-220.cisco.com [128.107.248.220]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D7D120319 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:17:25 -0400 (EDT) From: David Frascone To: capwap@frascone.com Message-ID: <20050722092715.7917c156@twoface.cisco.frascone.com> In-Reply-To: <000a01c58e75$fa3ac300$5905120a@china.huawei.com> References: <000a01c58e75$fa3ac300$5905120a@china.huawei.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.0.4a (GTK+ 1.2.10; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: BZe8R&S)}GEDsLp@ay#IT{'D/X6}Xu/])^zA7D2W{)kwVA7)IhgW*{QSX6W(\BWhSON`p7% e3xQ1oJ=Qb@cQf#x[_Qas)'1f0;9DQJ>02}F_!.`'y>LE~`8e'{XO=fNX{n#\1:s:`Xy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Re: help Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:27:15 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you received a welcome notice then you have been subscribed. -Dave On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 09:59:40 +0530 s17545 wrote: >Hi, If I accept welcome like this " Welcome to the Capwap@frascone.com >mailing list!", it means I already could subscribe mailing list of >CAPWAP???? > > > >Thanks > -- David Frascone Be nice to other people, they outnumber you 5.5 billion to 1. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From Duffen@iobox.fi Fri Jul 22 11:17:30 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DvzHE-0004EI-Ic for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:17:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA24227; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:17:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [200.88.230.212] (helo=iobox.fi) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DvzlJ-0001D3-9g; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:48:44 -0400 From: "Tavkhelidze George" To: "Zdanevich Andrew" Subject: Re[7]: discussion about his pills Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:17:33 +1100 Message-ID: <57bb01c58ed0$15fd72fc$54007977@iobox.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0123_456789AB.CDEF0123" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 4ec58ef3f343ebf5ac40a04538f9a6fc This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0123_456789AB.CDEF0123 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con ------=_NextPart_000_0123_456789AB.CDEF0123 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
SPU M
R-
<= /TABLE>






  Th ewe an Saf t Wa Ph macy 
e N st  d The  es y of  ar

Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by  %
reas ur Se ire and  rm vol 500
 
100 ural and  de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra
% Nat No Si ects  tras l-kno nds.
Expe ce thr es lon gas
rien ee tim ger or ms
 

 

































t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. Expe ce thr es lon gas rien ee tim ger or ms Wor de shi g wit hou ld Wi ppin hin 24 rs SP -M UR The we and Saf Wa Ph acy is Ne st The est y of arm Inc e Yo xual Des Spe ume by % reas ur Se ire and rm vol 500 100 ural and de Eff - in con t to wel wn bra % Nat No Si ects tras l-kno nds. ------=_NextPart_000_0123_456789AB.CDEF0123-- From capwap-admin@frascone.com Sat Jul 23 18:47:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DwSly-0007TR-0j for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:47:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA25464 for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D36F20553; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91B2A2054B; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:47:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EA9B2054B for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:46:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MMS1.broadcom.com (mms1.broadcom.com [216.31.210.17]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C940D20441 for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 18:46:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 10.10.64.121 by MMS1.broadcom.com with SMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (Email Firewall v6.1.0)); Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:43:31 -0700 X-Server-Uuid: 146C3151-C1DE-4F71-9D02-C3BE503878DD Received: from mail-irva-8.broadcom.com ([10.10.64.221]) by mail-irva-1.broadcom.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-72233U7200L2200S0V35) with ESMTP id com; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:43:51 -0700 Received: from mon-irva-10.broadcom.com (mon-irva-10.broadcom.com [10.10.64.171]) by mail-irva-8.broadcom.com (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id BLJ71449; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nt-sjca-0740.brcm.ad.broadcom.com ( nt-sjca-0740.sj.broadcom.com [10.16.192.49]) by mon-irva-10.broadcom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA21365; Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:43:50 -0700 (PDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: question on LWAPP-03 draft Thread-Index: AcWP1/67SZxJD57yTIWevta88HumIA== From: "Puneet Agarwal" To: capwap@frascone.com, pacalhou@cisco.com X-WSS-ID: 6EFC17992AW14467601-01-01 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C58FD8.031BCC37" X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] question on LWAPP-03 draft Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 15:43:57 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C58FD8.031BCC37 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Pat, =20 I had a couple of question on the "Division of Labor" in Split MAC = (section 11.1.1) in draft-ohara-capwap-lwapp-03.txt: =20 (a) In the draft, it is stated that the 802.11i "Encryption/Decryption" = can happen either on the WTP or on the AC. It further states that the Fragmentation/Defragmentation occurs on the WTP. If one considers the = case when Encryption/Decryption happens on the AC, then for a 802.11 = fragment, I do not see how the defragmentation can happen on the WTP. Each 802.11 fragment (of an MSDU) needs to be decrypted before it can be = defragmented. The one possible way I can see this happening would be Client--> WTP--->AC(decrypt)----> WTP(defrag)--->AC--->network but I presume that = this is not what you intended. =20 (b) Secondly, who maintains the counter for the "Sequence Number" = sub-field in the "Sequence-Control" field for frames transmitted to the Client? Is = it the AC or the WTP? It would seem that for split MAC, this should really = be maintained at the AC.=20 However in your Split MAC model you mention that "Beacon generation" is = a WTP functionality which would imply that this counter must really be = maintained in the WTP. This would imply that the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the 802.11 frames tunneled from the AC to WTP is effectively ignored by the = WTP. Is this the intended behavior? =20 Thanks. =20 -Puneet =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C58FD8.031BCC37 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi=20 Pat,
 
I had = a couple of=20 question on the "Division of Labor" in Split MAC (section 11.1.1) in=20 draft-ohara-capwap-lwapp-03.txt:
 
(a) In = the draft, it=20 is stated that the 802.11i "Encryption/Decryption" can happen either on = the WTP=20 or on the AC. It further states that the Fragmentation/Defragmentation = occurs on=20 the WTP. If one considers the case when = Encryption/Decryption happens on=20 the AC, then for a 802.11 fragment, I do not see how the defragmentation = can=20 happen on the WTP. Each 802.11 fragment (of an MSDU) needs to be = decrypted=20 before it can be defragmented. The one possible way I can see this = happening=20 would be Client--> WTP--->AC(decrypt)---->=20 WTP(defrag)--->AC--->network but I presume that this is not what = you=20 intended.
 
(b) = Secondly, who=20 maintains the counter for the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the=20 "Sequence-Control" field for frames transmitted to the Client? Is it the = AC or=20 the WTP? It would seem that for split MAC, this should really be = maintained at=20 the AC.
However in your=20 Split MAC model you mention that "Beacon generation" is a WTP = functionality=20 which would imply that this counter must really be maintained in the = WTP. This=20 would imply that the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the 802.11 frames = tunneled=20 from the AC to WTP is effectively ignored by the WTP. Is this the = intended=20 behavior?
 
Thanks.
 
-Puneet
   =20
=00 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C58FD8.031BCC37-- _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Sun Jul 24 11:46:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dwig5-00006U-ON for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:46:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05220 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:46:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3164A1FE17; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:46:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C2D202C1; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:46:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EB2C202C1 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:45:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75EDB1FE17 for ; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 11:45:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Jul 2005 08:45:24 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6OFjKun008024; Sun, 24 Jul 2005 08:45:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Sun, 24 Jul 2005 08:45:22 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A268079E@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: question on LWAPP-03 draft Thread-Index: AcWP1/67SZxJD57yTIWevta88HumIAAjL6fA From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Puneet Agarwal" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Jul 2005 15:45:22.0831 (UTC) FILETIME=[B3D8A1F0:01C59066] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: question on LWAPP-03 draft Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 08:45:22 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hopefully the following answers the questions to your satisfaction. Please let me know if you have any additional comments/questions. (a) That is precisely the problem that I have been raising regarding encryption in the AC. Fragmentation rarely (if ever) occurs today. Sure, it's in the 802.11 spec but no one does it. However, with the introduction of HCCA fragmentation will become commonplace in order to satisfy a service period. Therefore, fragmentation will have to occur on the WTP (which has real-time access to RF conditions), and as a consequence encryption will have to happen on the WTP. (b)Good question. The Sequence Number subfield is managed by the WTP, not the AC. I will need to add that clarification to the next rev of the document.=20 Thanks, Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems ________________________________ From: Puneet Agarwal [mailto:pagarwal@broadcom.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 3:44 PM To: capwap@frascone.com; Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) Subject: question on LWAPP-03 draft Hi Pat, =20 I had a couple of question on the "Division of Labor" in Split MAC (section 11.1.1) in draft-ohara-capwap-lwapp-03.txt: =20 (a) In the draft, it is stated that the 802.11i "Encryption/Decryption" can happen either on the WTP or on the AC. It further states that the Fragmentation/Defragmentation occurs on the WTP. If one considers the case when Encryption/Decryption happens on the AC, then for a 802.11 fragment, I do not see how the defragmentation can happen on the WTP. Each 802.11 fragment (of an MSDU) needs to be decrypted before it can be defragmented. The one possible way I can see this happening would be Client--> WTP--->AC(decrypt)----> WTP(defrag)--->AC--->network but I presume that this is not what you intended.=20 =20 (b) Secondly, who maintains the counter for the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the "Sequence-Control" field for frames transmitted to the Client? Is it the AC or the WTP? It would seem that for split MAC, this should really be maintained at the AC.=20 However in your Split MAC model you mention that "Beacon generation" is a WTP functionality which would imply that this counter must really be maintained in the WTP. This would imply that the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the 802.11 frames tunneled from the AC to WTP is effectively ignored by the WTP. Is this the intended behavior? _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Mon Jul 25 19:36:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxCUU-0001xx-9L for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:36:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA06758 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8205120579; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:36:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E28A2056B; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:36:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBC842056B for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:35:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MMS1.broadcom.com (mms1.broadcom.com [216.31.210.17]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D0C20565 for ; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:34:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 10.10.64.121 by MMS1.broadcom.com with SMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (Email Firewall v6.1.0)); Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:33:50 -0700 X-Server-Uuid: 146C3151-C1DE-4F71-9D02-C3BE503878DD Received: from mail-irva-8.broadcom.com ([10.10.64.221]) by mail-irva-1.broadcom.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-72233U7200L2200S0V35) with ESMTP id com; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:33:57 -0700 Received: from mon-irva-10.broadcom.com (mon-irva-10.broadcom.com [10.10.64.171]) by mail-irva-8.broadcom.com (MOS 3.5.6-GR) with ESMTP id BLR08943; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:33:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nt-sjca-0740.brcm.ad.broadcom.com ( nt-sjca-0740.sj.broadcom.com [10.16.192.49]) by mon-irva-10.broadcom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA25218; Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:33:57 -0700 (PDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: question on LWAPP-03 draft Thread-Index: AcWP1/67SZxJD57yTIWevta88HumIAAjL6fAAEEMX7A= From: "Puneet Agarwal" To: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" , capwap@frascone.com X-WSS-ID: 6EFBA9542AW15286325-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: question on LWAPP-03 draft Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 16:33:57 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Pat, Thanks for your clarifications. A few follow-on comments and a couple of = new questions. (a) I completely agree with you that with the introduction of HCCA, it = makes sense to have the .11 fragmentation and hence .11i encryption at the = WTP. By the symmetry argument, I presume that you are also implying that .11i decryption and .11 defragmentation should also happen at the WTP (for = LWAPP Split MAC). (b) Thanks for clarifying this. As a corollary, it would be great if you could also state what .11 header fields MUST be valid when sending a .11 frame (in LWAPP) from the AC to the WTP. I assume that, at the minimum, = the Address1, Address2 and Address3 fields MUST be valid. If this is a .11e enabled client, then the TID field MUST be valid. However what is not = clear is that if the client needs .11i encryption, is the AC required to = attach the .11i dummy CCMP header as well as a dummy MIC to the .11 data frame = before sending it to the WTP (in a LWAPP tunnel)? (c) While LWAPP tunneling, an AC implementation may decide to fragment = at the .11 level to get over network MTU limits and avoid LWAPP/IP = fragmentation (it seems to be legal in LWAPP though there is no explicit mention in the = spec either allowing/disallowing it). In this case, the WTP implementations = will require valid values in the "Sequence number" and "Fragment number" for correct LWAPP reassembly - though these may be rewritten by the WTP = before transmission to the Client. Hence it would be great if you could specify which .11 fields MUST be valid and which fields are ignored by the WTP = for data packets received by the WTP from the AC. (d) For packets from Client to the network, the WTP will reassemble the fragmented .11 frames. In order to send the MSDU to the AC, the WTP = would need to create a new .11 header (before encapsulation the frame into a = LWAPP tunnel) but without fragments (ie .11 Header.More_Frag =3D 0). Is this a correct assumption? Similarly, if the Client's frame came in with .11i encryption, then will = the WTP send the MSDU to the AC with a dummy .11i CCMP header/MIC or will it remove the .11i CCMP header. Hence it would be great if you can clarify = which .11 header fields must be valid when .11 data frames are sent from WTP = to AC (in LWAPP). Thanks. -Puneet -----Original Message----- From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pacalhou@cisco.com]=20 Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 8:45 AM To: Puneet Agarwal; capwap@frascone.com Subject: RE: question on LWAPP-03 draft Hopefully the following answers the questions to your satisfaction. = Please let me know if you have any additional comments/questions. (a) That is precisely the problem that I have been raising regarding encryption in the AC. Fragmentation rarely (if ever) occurs today. Sure, = it's in the 802.11 spec but no one does it. However, with the introduction of = HCCA fragmentation will become commonplace in order to satisfy a service = period. Therefore, fragmentation will have to occur on the WTP (which has = real-time access to RF conditions), and as a consequence encryption will have to = happen on the WTP. (b)Good question. The Sequence Number subfield is managed by the WTP, = not the AC. I will need to add that clarification to the next rev of the = document.=20 Thanks, Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems ________________________________ From: Puneet Agarwal [mailto:pagarwal@broadcom.com]=20 Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 3:44 PM To: capwap@frascone.com; Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) Subject: question on LWAPP-03 draft Hi Pat, =20 I had a couple of question on the "Division of Labor" in Split MAC (section 11.1.1) in draft-ohara-capwap-lwapp-03.txt: =20 (a) In the draft, it is stated that the 802.11i "Encryption/Decryption" can happen either on the WTP or on the AC. It = further states that the Fragmentation/Defragmentation occurs on the WTP. If one considers the case when Encryption/Decryption happens on the AC, then = for a 802.11 fragment, I do not see how the defragmentation can happen on the = WTP. Each 802.11 fragment (of an MSDU) needs to be decrypted before it can be defragmented. The one possible way I can see this happening would be Client--> WTP--->AC(decrypt)----> WTP(defrag)--->AC--->network but I = presume that this is not what you intended.=20 =20 (b) Secondly, who maintains the counter for the "Sequence Number" sub-field in the "Sequence-Control" field for frames transmitted to the Client? Is it the AC or the WTP? It would seem that for split MAC, this should really be maintained at the AC.=20 However in your Split MAC model you mention that "Beacon generation" is a WTP functionality which would imply that this counter must really = be maintained in the WTP. This would imply that the "Sequence Number" = sub-field in the 802.11 frames tunneled from the AC to WTP is effectively ignored = by the WTP. Is this the intended behavior? _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 26 11:23:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxRGv-0001NQ-JP for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:23:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA27360 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:23:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C460205B0; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:23:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6981420596; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:23:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03ABF20596 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:22:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (smtp.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0EC420594 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:22:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943BA@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thread-Topic: CAPWAP protocol issues Thread-Index: AcWR3BqyLJyis9aVR6C6s8UGUhXCjg== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 From: "Richard Gwee" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:18:17 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I have these few observations and like to seek some clarifications. =20 As we know, CAPWAP has the following objectives of logical groups (sec = 5.1.1) and support for traffic separation (sec 5.1.2). The logical = groups objective state that the CAPWAP protocol must be capable of = managing logical grouping of WTPs while the support for traffic = separation objective require that control messages does not involve any = form of combination with data traffic. However, i notice that some of = the proposed protocols support logical grouping in a incomplete manner. = For example, LWAPP in 802.11 networks provides logical grouping through = 802.11 binding messages which is only on the wireless domain. I think = the CAPWAP protocol should cover both wired and wireless domains in its = logical grouping. I believe this can help to make sure that the CAPWAP = protocol meets the objectives of logical groups and traffic separation = in a more complete manner. =20 Appreciate any comments. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning to fully = adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore, continues to = strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service = standards with the following certifications: Singapore Quality Class = (SQC) certification, People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO = 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 26 11:56:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxRmr-0001wt-6l for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:56:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA29900 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:56:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6216C205B0; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:56:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF37020596; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:56:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405F620596 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:55:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A8B20594 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 11:55:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 26 Jul 2005 08:55:16 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6QFtCut018415; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:55:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:55:09 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A271101B@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Thread-Index: AcWR3BqyLJyis9aVR6C6s8UGUhXCjgAHZa2w From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Richard Gwee" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jul 2005 15:55:09.0680 (UTC) FILETIME=[66762F00:01C591FA] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:55:08 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That is a fair point. I agree with your assessment that a CAPWAP protocol must fully describe how logical groups are provided, down to how user data is mapped on the wire. The LWAPP protocol has two options, depending upon the architecture: 1. Split MAC (User data tunneled to AC). In this mode, how the mapping occurs between the SSID and the VLAN is implementation specific since there is no additional messaging that is required between the AC and the WTP. 2. Local MAC (User data not tunneled to AC). In this mode, the AC sends the VLAN for a given user to the WTP. The WTP then assigns the station to the VLAN ensuring that the logical grouping is observed both over the air and over the wire. This is discussed in section 11.1.2. I hope this helps, Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com=20 > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 5:18 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues >=20 > Hi, > =20 > I have these few observations and like to seek some clarifications. > =20 > As we know, CAPWAP has the following objectives of logical=20 > groups (sec 5.1.1) and support for traffic separation (sec=20 > 5.1.2). The logical groups objective state that the CAPWAP=20 > protocol must be capable of managing logical grouping of WTPs=20 > while the support for traffic separation objective require=20 > that control messages does not involve any form of=20 > combination with data traffic. However, i notice that some of=20 > the proposed protocols support logical grouping in a=20 > incomplete manner. For example, LWAPP in 802.11 networks=20 > provides logical grouping through 802.11 binding messages=20 > which is only on the wireless domain. I think the CAPWAP=20 > protocol should cover both wired and wireless domains in its=20 > logical grouping. I believe this can help to make sure that=20 > the CAPWAP protocol meets the objectives of logical groups=20 > and traffic separation in a more complete manner. > =20 > Appreciate any comments. > =20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee >=20 >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road,=20 > Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning=20 > to fully adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in=20 > Singapore, continues to strive towards best practices and=20 > maintain excellence in service standards with the following=20 > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification,=20 > People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001,=20 > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for=20 > the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed=20 > and contains information that is privileged and confidential.=20 > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended=20 > recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy=20 > this communication. If you have received this communication=20 > in error, please notify us immediately by return email and=20 > delete the original message. Thank you. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap >=20 _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 26 16:50:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxWNQ-0007hL-PY for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:50:12 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA23245 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:50:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C422205BA; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:50:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C44C20594; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:50:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98FB520594 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:49:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext03.nokia.com (mgw-ext03.nokia.com [131.228.20.95]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6782051E for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:49:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh107.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.143]) by mgw-ext03.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j6QKj7oV001701; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:45:13 +0300 Received: from daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.112]) by esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:48:49 +0300 Received: from mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.64.23]) by daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 15:48:46 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <893AE265F4ADF94AB7FB26D31A788E410C126C@mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com> Thread-Topic: CAPWAP WGLC on draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt Thread-Index: AcWDOlrqyoWa+7IoTi6UhbK26Xa/5gO5kKQA From: To: Cc: , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jul 2005 20:48:46.0168 (UTC) FILETIME=[6AB4ED80:01C59223] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] WGLC has ended for draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:48:45 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The last call on draft "Objectives for Control and Provisioning of = Wireless Access Points", = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt = closed last week (7/22/05). As we did not receive any comments on this = call, we will be forarding this to the IESG after IETF 63 for = consideration as an informational RFC. Thanks, WG Chairs > -----Original Message----- > From: Gellert Dorothy (Nokia-ES/MtView) =20 > Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:25 PM > To: 'capwap@frascone.com' > Cc: Mani Mahalingam (E-mail); Bert Wijnen (E-mail); Kessens David = (Nokia-NET/MtView); Gellert Dorothy (Nokia-ES/MtView) > Subject: CAPWAP WGLC on draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt >=20 >=20 > This is the announcement of the CAPWAP WG Last Call for comments on = the draft "Objectives for Control and Provisioning of Wireless Access = Points" prior to sending this draft to the IESG. The draft is available = on the IETF archive at: > = http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-capwap-objectives-03.txt >=20 > The CAPWAP WG Last Call will end on Friday, July 22, 2005. Please = review and provide comments to the CAPWAP WG mailing list by then. >=20 > Best Regards, > WG Chairs _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Tue Jul 26 19:59:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxZKK-00071C-LN for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:59:12 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA05505 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:59:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CE4205BA; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:59:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF50205C1; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:59:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7381A205BF for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:58:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp4.centerbeam.com (smtp4.centerbeam.com [63.120.115.248]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE1A0205BA for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:58:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cba0e2k00.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.25]) by smtp4.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 17:00:35 -0700 Received: from CBA0E2K06.CBA0.centerbeam.com ([64.95.101.40]) by cba0e2k00.CBA0.centerbeam.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:57:04 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=SHA1; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C5920B.87DB29F0" Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: yes Thread-Topic: IPR Disclosures related to CAPWAP Protocols Thread-Index: AcWHqagsL7DieDsTSRyFAIqOfUWzqQKkrn5Q From: "Darren Loher" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jul 2005 23:57:04.0087 (UTC) FILETIME=[B8CA8E70:01C5923D] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] IPR Disclosures related to CAPWAP Protocols Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 16:57:48 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C5920B.87DB29F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Are there intellectual property rights disclosures for all the CAPWAP protocols? So far I have only found reference to Airespace's statement regarding LWAPP at: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/airespace-ipr-draft-calhoun-seamoby-lwapp.txt According to https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/ipr_search.cgi there are no IPR disclosures if one searches by the working group name "CAPWAP". (the search functions are notoriously unreliable) -Darren ------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C5920B.87DB29F0 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIII3zCCAmcw ggHQoAMCAQICAw8USjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFADBiMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTElMCMGA1UEChMcVGhh d3RlIENvbnN1bHRpbmcgKFB0eSkgTHRkLjEsMCoGA1UEAxMjVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVt YWlsIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EwHhcNMDUwNzA1MTgxMDUzWhcNMDYwNzA1MTgxMDUzWjBJMR8wHQYDVQQD ExZUaGF3dGUgRnJlZW1haWwgTWVtYmVyMSYwJAYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhdkbG9oZXJAcm92aW5ncGxh bmV0LmNvbTCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAwgYkCgYEAuzQAKdK0RCb0UMiul+QEb1Ak2Z5W zRfSYFXRUuCF+q02rb/ErBZDL1uHZNaCcPiFSS2VYNnZk76p9U+AswSJqp8ZqrFcvb4cwaYLB9Hf 0fYOc66jKPdQ88km6q8gh9ITRteh6yHlLWSvQGzMpyIdxOWvmuImjJoodK7s2/UchkECAwEAAaNE MEIwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgSQMCIGA1UdEQQbMBmBF2Rsb2hlckByb3ZpbmdwbGFuZXQuY29tMAwG A1UdEwEB/wQCMAAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQADgYEAvxYJeel2RXVjzulFM1OE6E7bUz/aS1E2KD6L erDorpeW64766vPAIKYfKOS0Xp0Clos31Bblhrq+em6OyMd0oEsEPcoV7ZsVIrx1RqcHpBCVLSZi 0HmlhAW6ePCoywfT4tyghHlSK3p45mUX9pygFvSFDqcBNZdfN2aAjDRgTFMwggMtMIIClqADAgEC AgEAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMIHRMQswCQYDVQQGEwJaQTEVMBMGA1UECBMMV2VzdGVybiBDYXBl MRIwEAYDVQQHEwlDYXBlIFRvd24xGjAYBgNVBAoTEVRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nMSgwJgYDVQQL Ex9DZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFNlcnZpY2VzIERpdmlzaW9uMSQwIgYDVQQDExtUaGF3dGUgUGVyc29u YWwgRnJlZW1haWwgQ0ExKzApBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWHHBlcnNvbmFsLWZyZWVtYWlsQHRoYXd0ZS5j b20wHhcNOTYwMTAxMDAwMDAwWhcNMjAxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTATBgNV BAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUgQ29u c3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIGA1UE AxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25hbC1m cmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4GNADCBiQKBgQDUadfUsJRkW3Hp R9gMUbbqcpGwhF59LQ2PexLfhSV1KHQ6QixjJ5+Ve0vvfhmHHYbqo925zpZkGsIUbkSsfOaP6E0P cR9AOKYAo4d49vmUhl6t6sBeduvZFKNdbnp8DKVLVX8GGSl/npom1Wq7OCQIapjHsdqjmJH9edvl WsQcuQIDAQABoxMwETAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBAMfskn5O+PWW pWdiKqTwTRFg0G+NYFhhrCa7UjVcCM8w+6hKloofYkIjjBcP9LpknBesRynfnZhe0mxgcVyirNx5 4+duAEcftQ0o6AKd5Jr9E/Sm2Xyx+NxfIyYJkYBz0BQb3kOpgyXy5pwvFcr+pquKB3WLDN1RhGvk +NHOd6KBMIIDPzCCAqigAwIBAgIBDTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCB0TELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExFTAT BgNVBAgTDFdlc3Rlcm4gQ2FwZTESMBAGA1UEBxMJQ2FwZSBUb3duMRowGAYDVQQKExFUaGF3dGUg Q29uc3VsdGluZzEoMCYGA1UECxMfQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBTZXJ2aWNlcyBEaXZpc2lvbjEkMCIG A1UEAxMbVGhhd3RlIFBlcnNvbmFsIEZyZWVtYWlsIENBMSswKQYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhxwZXJzb25h bC1mcmVlbWFpbEB0aGF3dGUuY29tMB4XDTAzMDcxNzAwMDAwMFoXDTEzMDcxNjIzNTk1OVowYjEL MAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAqBgNV BAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBMIGfMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUA A4GNADCBiQKBgQDEpjxVc1X7TrnKmVoeaMB1BHCd3+n/ox7svc31W/Iadr1/DDph8r9RzgHU5VAK MNcCY1osiRVwjt3J8CuFWqo/cVbLrzwLB+fxH5E2JCoTzyvV84J3PQO+K/67GD4Hv0CAAmTXp6a7 n2XRxSpUhQ9IBH+nttE8YQRAHmQZcmC3+wIDAQABo4GUMIGRMBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAw QwYDVR0fBDwwOjA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2NybC50aGF3dGUuY29tL1RoYXd0ZVBlcnNvbmFsRnJl ZW1haWxDQS5jcmwwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMCkGA1UdEQQiMCCkHjAcMRowGAYDVQQDExFQcml2YXRl TGFiZWwyLTEzODANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOBgQBIjNFQg+oLLswNo2asZw9/r6y+whehQ5aUnX9M Ibj4Nh+qLZ82L8D0HFAgk3A8/a3hYWLD2ToZfoSxmRsAxRoLgnSeJVCUYsfbJ3FXJY3dqZw5jowg T2Vfldr394fWxghOrvbqNOUQGls1TXfjViF4gtwhGTXeJLHTHUb/XV9lTzGCAZUwggGRAgEBMGkw YjELMAkGA1UEBhMCWkExJTAjBgNVBAoTHFRoYXd0ZSBDb25zdWx0aW5nIChQdHkpIEx0ZC4xLDAq BgNVBAMTI1RoYXd0ZSBQZXJzb25hbCBGcmVlbWFpbCBJc3N1aW5nIENBAgMPFEowCQYFKw4DAhoF AKCBgzAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNTA3MjYyMzU3 NDdaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBStcIhVLtZe82xxtinWQxozpSQ0SzAkBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xFzAV MAcGBSsOAwIaMAoGCCqGSIb3DQIFMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIGAgwlykMFKEAo4R5wWEAHJZuBO BkWiiraJRibXL2z65wgZHw6RozekWzaW8HXfhuRASm+OOFS0LS2DVjJ05zthOD1cXBg/FQC3lvHn 7VjNuWMEPJPGwWd6rCXoqK6qTxNZK1bQOZ8erPonr1cTrbQBeTsjezJqodJlYlV5OL67MFYAAAAA AAA= ------=_NextPart_000_00AF_01C5920B.87DB29F0-- _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 27 03:31:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxgNh-0003Vz-0a for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:31:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA03814 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:31:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213F3205C6; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:31:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A9812048E; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:31:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16AEA2048E for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:30:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (staff-mail.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7949F2046D for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:30:56 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943BE@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Thread-Index: AcWR3BqyLJyis9aVR6C6s8UGUhXCjgAHZa2wACC7etE= From: "Richard Gwee" To: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" , X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:27:19 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Thanks for the swift reply. It is great that LWAPP fulfills the logical=20 group objective completely. It will be good if any proposed CAPWAP = protocols=20 can fulfill this objective in a similar manner. For the split-MAC=20 architecture, i understand from you that the mapping of the SSID and = VLAN is=20 implementation specific. I thought that it will be better to actually=20 provide a general form of framework in this aspect for more information. = =20 Regards Richard Gwee ________________________________ From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pcalhoun@cisco.com] Sent: Tue 7/26/2005 11:55 PM To: Richard Gwee; capwap@frascone.com Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues That is a fair point. I agree with your assessment that a CAPWAP protocol must fully describe how logical groups are provided, down to how user data is mapped on the wire. The LWAPP protocol has two options, depending upon the architecture: 1. Split MAC (User data tunneled to AC). In this mode, how the mapping occurs between the SSID and the VLAN is implementation specific since there is no additional messaging that is required between the AC and the WTP. 2. Local MAC (User data not tunneled to AC). In this mode, the AC sends the VLAN for a given user to the WTP. The WTP then assigns the station to the VLAN ensuring that the logical grouping is observed both over the air and over the wire. This is discussed in section 11.1.2. I hope this helps, Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 5:18 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues > > Hi, >=20 > I have these few observations and like to seek some clarifications. >=20 > As we know, CAPWAP has the following objectives of logical > groups (sec 5.1.1) and support for traffic separation (sec > 5.1.2). The logical groups objective state that the CAPWAP > protocol must be capable of managing logical grouping of WTPs > while the support for traffic separation objective require > that control messages does not involve any form of > combination with data traffic. However, i notice that some of > the proposed protocols support logical grouping in a > incomplete manner. For example, LWAPP in 802.11 networks > provides logical grouping through 802.11 binding messages > which is only on the wireless domain. I think the CAPWAP > protocol should cover both wired and wireless domains in its > logical grouping. I believe this can help to make sure that > the CAPWAP protocol meets the objectives of logical groups > and traffic separation in a more complete manner. >=20 > Appreciate any comments. >=20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee > > > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, > Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . > > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning > to fully adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in > Singapore, continues to strive towards best practices and > maintain excellence in service standards with the following > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification, > People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for > the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed > and contains information that is privileged and confidential. > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended > recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy > this communication. If you have received this communication > in error, please notify us immediately by return email and > delete the original message. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 27 03:40:09 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DxgWP-0005VG-M4 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:40:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA04400 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42668205C9; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9FEC205C1; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:40:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 170B4205C1 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:39:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (smtp.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946D020527 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 03:39:52 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943C0@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: Some points on CAPWAP protocol thread-index: AcWSfl5ZcVonTK48Q7OrIkpz4hqufw== From: "Richard Gwee" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Some points on CAPWAP protocol Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:39:49 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I have a few points that i will like to make. =20 I notice from some proposed CAPWAP protocols that they support state = state information collection but does not explicitly state what kind of = information is monitored or exchanged and how to make use of it. I felt = that the CAPWAP proposal should at least explain such procedures so that = it will be easier to gauge how the proposal can perform effectively. =20 Another point is that given that the CAPWAP protocol supports a large = network, it is possible that a situation can occur in which the state = information or the number of control packets can be huge and incur high = costs in term of processing delay and memory usage. Furthermore, a high = control overhead can lead to a drop in available bandwidth that can = impair network performance especially in the wireless domain. Thus it is = also important that the operation of the CAPWAP protocol should be kept = as simpler as possible. =20 Appreciate any comments to my above observations. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning to fully = adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore, continues to = strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service = standards with the following certifications: Singapore Quality Class = (SQC) certification, People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO = 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 27 09:41:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dxm9m-0003Xv-O5 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:41:10 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA28492 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:41:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF20205CF; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3C97205C5; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:41:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A328B205C5 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:40:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-5.cisco.com (sj-iport-5.cisco.com [171.68.10.87]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA30A204CD for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 09:40:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Jul 2005 06:40:30 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: i="3.95,146,1120460400"; d="scan'208"; a="200869522:sNHT31684810" Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6RDeEIw021692; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:40:17 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A2711323@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: question on LWAPP-03 draft Thread-Index: AcWP1/67SZxJD57yTIWevta88HumIAAjL6fAAEEMX7AAUcCG0A== From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Puneet Agarwal" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2005 13:40:17.0681 (UTC) FILETIME=[B9AAE010:01C592B0] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] RE: question on LWAPP-03 draft Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 06:40:16 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable See below Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Puneet Agarwal [mailto:pagarwal@broadcom.com]=20 > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:34 PM > To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: question on LWAPP-03 draft >=20 > Hi Pat, >=20 > Thanks for your clarifications. A few follow-on comments and=20 > a couple of new questions. >=20 > (a) I completely agree with you that with the introduction of=20 > HCCA, it makes sense to have the .11 fragmentation and hence=20 > .11i encryption at the WTP. By the symmetry argument, I=20 > presume that you are also implying that .11i decryption and=20 > .11 defragmentation should also happen at the WTP (for LWAPP=20 > Split MAC). That is correct. Note that LWAPP supports the AC providing this feature, with the restriction that HCCA cannot be used (and this is not an LWAPP limitation, this is a technology limitation for any protocol that encrypts in the AC). >=20 > (b) Thanks for clarifying this. As a corollary, it would be=20 > great if you could also state what .11 header fields MUST be=20 > valid when sending a .11 frame (in LWAPP) from the AC to the=20 > WTP. I assume that, at the minimum, the Address1, Address2=20 > and Address3 fields MUST be valid. If this is a .11e enabled=20 > client, then the TID field MUST be valid. However what is not=20 > clear is that if the client needs .11i encryption, is the AC=20 > required to attach the .11i dummy CCMP header as well as a=20 > dummy MIC to the .11 data frame before sending it to the WTP=20 > (in a LWAPP tunnel)? Good point. Today, all of the address and 802.11e TID fields must be present, and include the proper values. However, the encryption pad is not present if encryption is done in the WTP. I will update the draft to make this explicit. >=20 > (c) While LWAPP tunneling, an AC implementation may decide to=20 > fragment at the > .11 level to get over network MTU limits and avoid LWAPP/IP=20 > fragmentation (it seems to be legal in LWAPP though there is=20 > no explicit mention in the spec either allowing/disallowing=20 > it). In this case, the WTP implementations will require valid=20 > values in the "Sequence number" and "Fragment number" for=20 > correct LWAPP reassembly - though these may be rewritten by=20 > the WTP before transmission to the Client. Hence it would be=20 > great if you could specify which .11 fields MUST be valid and=20 > which fields are ignored by the WTP for data packets received=20 > by the WTP from the AC. hmm.... We don't assume this because we cannot control the client - hence you have this problem in traffic from the station. I believe the current model the protocol provides is more reliable. >=20 > (d) For packets from Client to the network, the WTP will=20 > reassemble the fragmented .11 frames. In order to send the=20 > MSDU to the AC, the WTP would need to create a new .11 header=20 > (before encapsulation the frame into a LWAPP > tunnel) but without fragments (ie .11 Header.More_Frag =3D 0).=20 > Is this a correct assumption? > Similarly, if the Client's frame came in with .11i=20 > encryption, then will the WTP send the MSDU to the AC with a=20 > dummy .11i CCMP header/MIC or will it remove the .11i CCMP=20 > header. Hence it would be great if you can clarify which > .11 header fields must be valid when .11 data frames are sent=20 > from WTP to AC (in LWAPP). Correct, I believe this goes back to your point #2 (above), which we will address in the next version of the draft. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Wed Jul 27 11:19:11 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dxngd-0008J4-7R for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:19:11 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA06838 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:19:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2FC205CA; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B8320540; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:19:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71D320540 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:18:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A352046D for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 11:18:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Jul 2005 08:18:20 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6RFICJr000672; Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:18:17 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A271137D@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Thread-Index: AcWR3BqyLJyis9aVR6C6s8UGUhXCjgAHZa2wACC7etEAD3fUUA== From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Richard Gwee" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jul 2005 15:18:17.0483 (UTC) FILETIME=[6A4D75B0:01C592BE] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:18:16 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I understand your point in terms of providing some implementation direction, but my belief is that system behavior is really implementation specific and allows products to differentiate themselves. Further, RFC 3580 (ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3580.txt) how the tunnel attribute (section 3.31) is used to map the user to a specific VLAN.=20 Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Gwee [mailto:richard_gwee@rp.sg]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:27 AM > To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues >=20 > Hi, > Thanks for the swift reply. It is great that LWAPP fulfills=20 > the logical group objective completely. It will be good if=20 > any proposed CAPWAP protocols can fulfill this objective in a=20 > similar manner. For the split-MAC architecture, i understand=20 > from you that the mapping of the SSID and VLAN is=20 > implementation specific. I thought that it will be better to=20 > actually provide a general form of framework in this aspect=20 > for more information.=20 > =20 > Regards > Richard Gwee >=20 > ________________________________ >=20 > From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pcalhoun@cisco.com] > Sent: Tue 7/26/2005 11:55 PM > To: Richard Gwee; capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues >=20 >=20 >=20 > That is a fair point. I agree with your assessment that a=20 > CAPWAP protocol must fully describe how logical groups are=20 > provided, down to how user data is mapped on the wire. The=20 > LWAPP protocol has two options, depending upon the architecture: >=20 > 1. Split MAC (User data tunneled to AC). In this mode, how=20 > the mapping occurs between the SSID and the VLAN is=20 > implementation specific since there is no additional=20 > messaging that is required between the AC and the WTP. > 2. Local MAC (User data not tunneled to AC). In this mode,=20 > the AC sends the VLAN for a given user to the WTP. The WTP=20 > then assigns the station to the VLAN ensuring that the=20 > logical grouping is observed both over the air and over the=20 > wire. This is discussed in section 11.1.2. >=20 > I hope this helps, >=20 > Pat Calhoun > CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit > Cisco Systems >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com > > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 5:18 AM > > To: capwap@frascone.com > > Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues > > > > Hi, > >=20 > > I have these few observations and like to seek some clarifications. > >=20 > > As we know, CAPWAP has the following objectives of logical=20 > groups (sec=20 > > 5.1.1) and support for traffic separation (sec 5.1.2). The logical=20 > > groups objective state that the CAPWAP protocol must be capable of=20 > > managing logical grouping of WTPs while the support for traffic=20 > > separation objective require that control messages does not involve=20 > > any form of combination with data traffic. However, i=20 > notice that some=20 > > of the proposed protocols support logical grouping in a incomplete=20 > > manner. For example, LWAPP in 802.11 networks provides logical=20 > > grouping through 802.11 binding messages which is only on=20 > the wireless=20 > > domain. I think the CAPWAP protocol should cover both wired and=20 > > wireless domains in its logical grouping. I believe this=20 > can help to=20 > > make sure that the CAPWAP protocol meets the objectives of logical=20 > > groups and traffic separation in a more complete manner. > >=20 > > Appreciate any comments. > >=20 > > Thanks and regards > > Richard Gwee > > > > > > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore=20 > > 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . > > > > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher=20 > Learning to fully=20 > > adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore,=20 > continues to=20 > > strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service=20 > > standards with the following > > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification, People=20 > > Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for=20 > the use of=20 > > the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains=20 > > information that is privileged and confidential. > > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient,=20 > > you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this=20 > communication. If=20 > > you have received this communication in error, please notify us=20 > > immediately by return email and delete the original message. Thank=20 > > you. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Capwap mailing list > > Capwap@frascone.com > > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > > >=20 _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 28 10:41:13 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dy9ZR-0008Ta-7Z for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:41:13 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02476 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA9F7205DC; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FBD205D4; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:41:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E894D205D4 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:40:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (staff-mail.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF6820363 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:40:50 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943C1@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues Thread-Index: AcWR3BqyLJyis9aVR6C6s8UGUhXCjgAHZa2wACC7etEAD3fUUAAx58Lh From: "Richard Gwee" To: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" , X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:39:10 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Calhoun, =20 Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate your reply. =20 Regards Richard Gwee ________________________________ From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pcalhoun@cisco.com] Sent: Wed 7/27/2005 11:18 PM To: Richard Gwee; capwap@frascone.com Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues I understand your point in terms of providing some implementation direction, but my belief is that system behavior is really implementation specific and allows products to differentiate themselves. Further, RFC 3580 (ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3580.txt) how the tunnel attribute (section 3.31) is used to map the user to a specific VLAN. Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Gwee [mailto:richard_gwee@rp.sg] > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:27 AM > To: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou); capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues > > Hi, > Thanks for the swift reply. It is great that LWAPP fulfills > the logical group objective completely. It will be good if > any proposed CAPWAP protocols can fulfill this objective in a > similar manner. For the split-MAC architecture, i understand > from you that the mapping of the SSID and VLAN is > implementation specific. I thought that it will be better to > actually provide a general form of framework in this aspect > for more information. >=20 > Regards > Richard Gwee > > ________________________________ > > From: Pat Calhoun (pacalhou) [mailto:pcalhoun@cisco.com] > Sent: Tue 7/26/2005 11:55 PM > To: Richard Gwee; capwap@frascone.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues > > > > That is a fair point. I agree with your assessment that a > CAPWAP protocol must fully describe how logical groups are > provided, down to how user data is mapped on the wire. The > LWAPP protocol has two options, depending upon the architecture: > > 1. Split MAC (User data tunneled to AC). In this mode, how > the mapping occurs between the SSID and the VLAN is > implementation specific since there is no additional > messaging that is required between the AC and the WTP. > 2. Local MAC (User data not tunneled to AC). In this mode, > the AC sends the VLAN for a given user to the WTP. The WTP > then assigns the station to the VLAN ensuring that the > logical grouping is observed both over the air and over the > wire. This is discussed in section 11.1.2. > > I hope this helps, > > Pat Calhoun > CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit > Cisco Systems > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com > > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > > Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 5:18 AM > > To: capwap@frascone.com > > Subject: [Capwap] CAPWAP protocol issues > > > > Hi, > > > > I have these few observations and like to seek some clarifications. > > > > As we know, CAPWAP has the following objectives of logical > groups (sec > > 5.1.1) and support for traffic separation (sec 5.1.2). The logical > > groups objective state that the CAPWAP protocol must be capable of > > managing logical grouping of WTPs while the support for traffic > > separation objective require that control messages does not involve > > any form of combination with data traffic. However, i > notice that some > > of the proposed protocols support logical grouping in a incomplete > > manner. For example, LWAPP in 802.11 networks provides logical > > grouping through 802.11 binding messages which is only on > the wireless > > domain. I think the CAPWAP protocol should cover both wired and > > wireless domains in its logical grouping. I believe this > can help to > > make sure that the CAPWAP protocol meets the objectives of logical > > groups and traffic separation in a more complete manner. > > > > Appreciate any comments. > > > > Thanks and regards > > Richard Gwee > > > > > > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore > > 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . > > > > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher > Learning to fully > > adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore, > continues to > > strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service > > standards with the following > > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification, People > > Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, > > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for > the use of > > the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains > > information that is privileged and confidential. > > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient, > > you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this > communication. If > > you have received this communication in error, please notify us > > immediately by return email and delete the original message. Thank > > you. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Capwap mailing list > > Capwap@frascone.com > > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > > > _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 28 11:00:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dy9rn-0005iz-SZ for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:00:12 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA03699 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:00:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F077A205DD; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:00:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55CCB205D4; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 11:00:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F07C205D4 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:59:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from staff-mail.rp.edu.sg (staff-mail.rp.edu.sg [202.21.158.80]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E7220363 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 10:59:37 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <9C374CF75527504394E573E1937136C4C943C2@staff-mail.rp.edu.sg> Thread-Topic: Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol thread-index: AcWTgmGQ8/RHoKmfRfuU/e3tKq3CGg== From: "Richard Gwee" To: X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Subject: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:59:35 +0800 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, =20 I have a few questions to make. =20 For the 802.11i considerations objective, we have to take into account = an architecture in which the AC provides authentication function while = the WTP provides the encryption function. I believe such architecture is = highly likely and need to be considered seriously. However, in some of = the proposed protocols, i notice that such designs are not discussed = thoroughly. Most protocols discuss on how the AC and WTP can perform = security updates. In my opinion, the way on how the CAPWAP protocol can = best perform under this kind of architecture is rather important. Is = this aspect supposed to be implementation specific or can i be = enlightened on how the CAPWAP protocol can be used effectively on such = an architecture? =20 For the interoperability objective, most protocols does mention support = for this objective in their specifications but i cannot figure out how = is this objective fulfilled. In the event that there is two types of WTP = i.e. local MAC and split MAC WTPs linked to a single AC, how will the AC = manage the traffic from these two types of WTPs? Ideally, the AC should = be able to handle traffic from both types of WTPs without much hassle. =20 Appreciate any reply and comments. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee =20 =20 Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning to fully = adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore, continues to = strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service = standards with the following certifications: Singapore Quality Class = (SQC) certification, People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO = 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 28 12:01:18 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DyAow-0005mm-91 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:01:18 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08232 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:01:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C9D205D9; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:01:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4762D205E8; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:01:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E599205D4 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:00:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com (sj-iport-4.cisco.com [171.68.10.86]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4AE204A0 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:00:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Jul 2005 09:00:37 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6SG0XIs027774; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:00:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:00:35 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A2711728@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Thread-Index: AcWTgmGQ8/RHoKmfRfuU/e3tKq3CGgACYY3w From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: "Richard Gwee" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2005 16:00:35.0903 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DBB5CF0:01C5938D] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:00:35 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Richard, Once more a good question. The issue you raised is not only required for interoperability, but as correctly pointed out by Charles Clancy in his LWAPP security review, failure to mention proper protocol behavior can lead to system vulnerabilities and possible DoS attacks.=20 LWAPP has addressed this issue in section 11.2, which does into detail on how the AC uses the LWAPP protocol in light of an 802.11i roaming event. The process describes addresses the security issue raised during the review process, and is sufficient to ensure interoperability. Note that the introduction of 802.11r will significantly simplify how secure roaming works, but that standard isn't expected for at least another year.=20 To address your second question, how does roaming from a Local to Split MAC WTP occur is an interesting question, and is one that only works with specific deployment constraints. If a user begins his session on a Split MAC WTP, he/she will be assigned an IP address from one of the subnets supported by the AC. However, if a roam event occurs to a Local MAC WTP, which for me means no tunneling of user data to the AC, then that WTP would also have to have access to the same VLANs as the ones on the AC. So this scenario works as long as the AC and the WTP have access to the same user VLAN/subnets. Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com=20 > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:00 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and=20 > Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol >=20 > Hi, > =20 > I have a few questions to make. > =20 > For the 802.11i considerations objective, we have to take=20 > into account an architecture in which the AC provides=20 > authentication function while the WTP provides the encryption=20 > function. I believe such architecture is highly likely and=20 > need to be considered seriously. However, in some of the=20 > proposed protocols, i notice that such designs are not=20 > discussed thoroughly. Most protocols discuss on how the AC=20 > and WTP can perform security updates. In my opinion, the way=20 > on how the CAPWAP protocol can best perform under this kind=20 > of architecture is rather important. Is this aspect supposed=20 > to be implementation specific or can i be enlightened on how=20 > the CAPWAP protocol can be used effectively on such an architecture? > =20 > For the interoperability objective, most protocols does=20 > mention support for this objective in their specifications=20 > but i cannot figure out how is this objective fulfilled. In=20 > the event that there is two types of WTP i.e. local MAC and=20 > split MAC WTPs linked to a single AC, how will the AC manage=20 > the traffic from these two types of WTPs? Ideally, the AC=20 > should be able to handle traffic from both types of WTPs=20 > without much hassle. > =20 > Appreciate any reply and comments. > =20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee > =20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road,=20 > Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning=20 > to fully adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in=20 > Singapore, continues to strive towards best practices and=20 > maintain excellence in service standards with the following=20 > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification,=20 > People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001,=20 > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for=20 > the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed=20 > and contains information that is privileged and confidential.=20 > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended=20 > recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy=20 > this communication. If you have received this communication=20 > in error, please notify us immediately by return email and=20 > delete the original message. Thank you. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap >=20 _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 28 15:16:13 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DyDrZ-0007fp-B2 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:16:13 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA22388 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:16:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7ADCE205F4; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:16:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9512F205EE; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:16:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5842205EE for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:15:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext04.nokia.com (mgw-ext04.nokia.com [131.228.20.96]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79DE32042D for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:15:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext04.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j6SJ7r1u019001; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:07:54 +0300 Received: from daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.112]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:13:37 +0300 Received: from mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.19.64.23]) by daebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 14:13:34 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Message-ID: <893AE265F4ADF94AB7FB26D31A788E410C1272@mvebe101.NOE.Nokia.com> Thread-Topic: Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Thread-Index: AcWTgmGQ8/RHoKmfRfuU/e3tKq3CGgAJJorA From: To: , Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2005 19:13:34.0812 (UTC) FILETIME=[734CA9C0:01C593A8] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:13:33 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Richard- Thanks for the comments on the protocols and requirements. We just = finished an WG Last Call on the Objectives draft, and although some of = your comments are addressed there at a high level, I thought I'd give = you an opportunity to expand on the objectives if you like, espcially = since we've haven't received any comments during WGLC so far, and I = can't submit the Objectives draft to the IESG until after the IETF 63 = meeting. Additionally, the evaluation team will report on their findings and = release their draft at the IETF meeting. You can also raise these = points with the evaluation team, during the meeting if you are = attending, or on the WG list when the WG has a chance to comment. They = have done an excellent job so far. As we finalize the evaluation process and protocol, the WG will have an = opportunity to further refine the protocol to address comments such as = yours. Thanks, Dorothy =20 -----Original Message----- From: capwap-admin@frascone.com [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com]On Behalf Of ext Richard Gwee Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:00 AM To: capwap@frascone.com Subject: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Hi, =20 I have a few questions to make. =20 For the 802.11i considerations objective, we have to take into account = an architecture in which the AC provides authentication function while = the WTP provides the encryption function. I believe such architecture is = highly likely and need to be considered seriously. However, in some of = the proposed protocols, i notice that such designs are not discussed = thoroughly. Most protocols discuss on how the AC and WTP can perform = security updates. In my opinion, the way on how the CAPWAP protocol can = best perform under this kind of architecture is rather important. Is = this aspect supposed to be implementation specific or can i be = enlightened on how the CAPWAP protocol can be used effectively on such = an architecture? =20 For the interoperability objective, most protocols does mention support = for this objective in their specifications but i cannot figure out how = is this objective fulfilled. In the event that there is two types of WTP = i.e. local MAC and split MAC WTPs linked to a single AC, how will the AC = manage the traffic from these two types of WTPs? Ideally, the AC should = be able to handle traffic from both types of WTPs without much hassle. =20 Appreciate any reply and comments. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee =20 =20 Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 = . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning to fully = adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in Singapore, continues to = strive towards best practices and maintain excellence in service = standards with the following certifications: Singapore Quality Class = (SQC) certification, People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO = 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of = the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains = information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of = this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not = disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received = this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return = email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Thu Jul 28 15:24:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DyDzF-0001CD-Fw for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:24:09 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA23312 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:24:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A58D205F6; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:24:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BF6205EE; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:24:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A322205EE for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:23:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from aruba-mx.arubanetworks.com (mail.arubanetworks.com [216.31.249.253]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 703FB20451 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:23:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from aruba-mx1.arubanetworks.com ([10.1.1.17]) by aruba-mx.arubanetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:23:54 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] Question on SLAPP discover request payload Message-ID: <99C8B9B2AD99664A87E12C839A2E90936F5D00@aruba-mx1.arubanetworks.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Question on SLAPP discover request payload Thread-Index: AcWMzzrJN31wiehuQC6nSji0MlTGVwG2YZoQ From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jul 2005 19:23:54.0886 (UTC) FILETIME=[E4E47260:01C593A9] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:23:43 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Richard, I apologize for the delay in responding to your question.=20 One of the requirements in the CAPWAP objectives is a firmware download trigger. In order to determine whether an update is required and to select the correct firmware image for a particular WTP, it is good to know its hardware version in addition to a vendor ID and its current software version.=20 Thanks partha -----Original Message----- From: capwap-admin@frascone.com [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gwee Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:04 PM To: capwap@frascone.com Subject: [Capwap] Question on SLAPP discover request payload Hi, =20 I have a question on the SLAPP discover request payload. In the draft, the SLAPP discover request packet contains HW version information. What is the rationale for this HW version to be present and how can this HW version information actually benefit the CAPWAP protocol? If the WTP and AC are from different vendors, do they need to recognise each other's HW version? From my perspective, i thought that this seem to suggest a form of dependency between the protocol performance and hardware. =20 Appreciate any enlightenments. =20 Thanks and regards Richard Gwee Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road, Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . Republic Polytechnic, the first institute of higher learning to fully adopt Problem-Based Learning in Singapore, has scored another first by achieving the People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001, 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications) within the first year of our operation. --------------------------------------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains information that is privileged and confidential. If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this communication. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return email and delete the original message. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap From capwap-admin@frascone.com Fri Jul 29 14:14:12 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DyZN5-0003tS-M6 for capwap-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:14:12 -0400 Received: from mail.frascone.com (postfix@frascone.com [204.49.99.9]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA27679 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:14:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F74202A2; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:14:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from xavier (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B69F1FF1F; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:14:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: capwap@frascone.com Delivered-To: capwap@frascone.com Received: from localhost (xavier [127.0.0.1]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C54B1FF1F for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:13:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by mail.frascone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4C01FE03 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:12:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (171.71.177.254) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jul 2005 11:12:58 -0700 Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j6TICqul013150; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com ([128.107.191.85]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:12:57 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Message-ID: <4FF84B0BC277FF45AA27FE969DD956A2711AF7@xmb-sjc-235.amer.cisco.com> Thread-Topic: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol Thread-Index: AcWTgmGQ8/RHoKmfRfuU/e3tKq3CGgAJJorAADBWr6A= From: "Pat Calhoun (pacalhou)" To: , , Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jul 2005 18:12:57.0278 (UTC) FILETIME=[2592C5E0:01C59469] X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Sender: capwap-admin@frascone.com Errors-To: capwap-admin@frascone.com X-BeenThere: capwap@frascone.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: A list for CAPWAP technical discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:12:56 -0700 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12 (frascone.com) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I believe that Richard made a really good point that the Logical groups objective is not sufficient.=20 The current Protocol Requirements text reads: "The CAPWAP protocol MUST be capable of controlling and managingphysical WTPs in terms of logical groups including BSSID-based groups." I would re-phrase to: "The CAPWAP protocol MUST be capable of controlling and managing physical WTPs in terms of logical groups including BSSID-based groups. For non-tunneled mode, the protocols MUST also provide the provisions to configure the associated VLAN (or subnet) which is to be used by the WTP in bridging traffic for the logical group." Pat Calhoun CTO, Wireless Networking Business Unit Cisco Systems =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com=20 > [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com] On Behalf Of=20 > Dorothy.Gellert@nokia.com > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 12:14 PM > To: richard_gwee@rp.sg; capwap@frascone.com > Cc: mmani@avaya.com > Subject: RE: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and=20 > Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol >=20 > Hi Richard- >=20 > Thanks for the comments on the protocols and requirements. =20 > We just finished an WG Last Call on the Objectives draft, and=20 > although some of your comments are addressed there at a high=20 > level, I thought I'd give you an opportunity to expand on the=20 > objectives if you like, espcially since we've haven't=20 > received any comments during WGLC so far, and I can't submit=20 > the Objectives draft to the IESG until after the IETF 63 meeting. >=20 > Additionally, the evaluation team will report on their=20 > findings and release their draft at the IETF meeting. You=20 > can also raise these points with the evaluation team, during=20 > the meeting if you are attending, or on the WG list when the=20 > WG has a chance to comment. They have done an excellent job so far. >=20 > As we finalize the evaluation process and protocol, the WG=20 > will have an opportunity to further refine the protocol to=20 > address comments such as yours. >=20 > Thanks, > Dorothy > =20 >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: capwap-admin@frascone.com [mailto:capwap-admin@frascone.com]On > Behalf Of ext Richard Gwee > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 8:00 AM > To: capwap@frascone.com > Subject: [Capwap] Questions on the 802.11i and=20 > Interoperability for CAPWAP protocol >=20 >=20 > Hi, > =20 > I have a few questions to make. > =20 > For the 802.11i considerations objective, we have to take=20 > into account an architecture in which the AC provides=20 > authentication function while the WTP provides the encryption=20 > function. I believe such architecture is highly likely and=20 > need to be considered seriously. However, in some of the=20 > proposed protocols, i notice that such designs are not=20 > discussed thoroughly. Most protocols discuss on how the AC=20 > and WTP can perform security updates. In my opinion, the way=20 > on how the CAPWAP protocol can best perform under this kind=20 > of architecture is rather important. Is this aspect supposed=20 > to be implementation specific or can i be enlightened on how=20 > the CAPWAP protocol can be used effectively on such an architecture? > =20 > For the interoperability objective, most protocols does=20 > mention support for this objective in their specifications=20 > but i cannot figure out how is this objective fulfilled. In=20 > the event that there is two types of WTP i.e. local MAC and=20 > split MAC WTPs linked to a single AC, how will the AC manage=20 > the traffic from these two types of WTPs? Ideally, the AC=20 > should be able to handle traffic from both types of WTPs=20 > without much hassle. > =20 > Appreciate any reply and comments. > =20 > Thanks and regards > Richard Gwee > =20 > =20 >=20 >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, Tanglin Campus, 1 Kay Siang Road,=20 > Singapore 248922 . Website: www.rp.sg . Fax: +65 6415-1310 . >=20 > Republic Polytechnic, the first Institute of Higher Learning=20 > to fully adopt the Problem-Based Learning approach in=20 > Singapore, continues to strive towards best practices and=20 > maintain excellence in service standards with the following=20 > certifications: Singapore Quality Class (SQC) certification,=20 > People Developer Standards and QEHS standards (ISO 9001,=20 > 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certifications). > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION: This message is intended only for=20 > the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed=20 > and contains information that is privileged and confidential.=20 > If you, the reader of this message, are not the intended=20 > recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy=20 > this communication. If you have received this communication=20 > in error, please notify us immediately by return email and=20 > delete the original message. Thank you. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap > _______________________________________________ > Capwap mailing list > Capwap@frascone.com > http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap >=20 _______________________________________________ Capwap mailing list Capwap@frascone.com http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap
Wor de shi g wit hou
ld Wi ppin hin 24  rs