Hi. Thanks for the responses. There only seem to be a couple of discussion points.
The WLAN issue has been done to death elsewhere. I will be happy with whatever expansion you agree on. On s7.2. Yes, my mistake. They aren't duplicates. I'll await the revised draft. Regards, Elwyn young wrote: > Hi, Elwyn: > > Thanks. Please check my comments. > > s3: WLAN is defined but no expansion of the acronym is given. > [Editors] > It (WLAN) is got from the RFC5416 and the RFC5416 does not give any > expansion > of the acronym. > The issue here is: If we give an expansion to the WLAN (in the RFC5416), > readers would be confused with the WLAN (wireless local area networks) in > the IEEE 802.11. > You know: The RFC5416 talks about WLAN as a logic service, while the IEEE > 802.11 > talks about it as certain network. > Dan or CAPWAP chairs, please give some guidance here. Thanks. > > s5.1: Possibly define/expand PHY. > [Editors] > How about: would use “physical layer (PHY)”in the place where it (PHY) > first appear. During the review of draft-ietf-capwap-base-mib-06.txt, a same > issues > Ever be raised. In the end, it was suggested to use the above way to modify. > Suggest to keep same. > > s5.2, next to last bullet: s/manage/management/ > [Editors] Yes, should be management > > s5.3, last sentence; expand BSS acronym > [Editors] Yes, should be "basic service set (BSS)". > > s7.2: The paragraph > >> Also, the AC MUST have a mechanism that preserves the value of the >> WLAN Profile Interfaces' ifIndexes in the ifTable at AC reboot. >> is duplicated (last and last but 2). >> > [Editors] Although both sentences talk about the persistence mechanism of > the interface, the first one is for WLAN Profile Interface, and other one is > for WLAN BSS Interfaces. > So it is not duplicated. Please check it again. Thanks. > > s8: The IP addresses should be taken from the 'example' ranges (see > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iana-ipv4-examples-01). I don't know > that there is an example MAC address - the RFC Editor should know. > > [Editors] Ok, I never knew it before. The Ip would use the blocks > 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1). I have not found any block (RFC document rules) > for MAC address, so I suppose RFC Editor should know it. > For Ip address, draft-ietf-capwap-base-mib-06.txt has a same issue and > should be modified too. > > s9: Maybe WLAN and BSS should be expanded here in the descriptions as well. > [Editors] Yes, BSS is ok. According to my comments to the s3, it requires > more > discussion. > > Regards > > Richard > > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Elwyn Davies [mailto:[email protected]] > 发送时间: 2009年12月13日 6:57 > 收件人: General Area Reviwing Team > 抄送: Mary Barnes; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > 主题: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-capwap-802dot11-mib-05.txt > > I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) > reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see > _http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html_). > > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments > you may receive. > > Document: draft-ietf-capwap-802dot11-mib-05.txt > Reviewer: Elwyn Davies > Review Date: 12 December 2009 > IETF LC End Date: 7 December 2009 > IESG Telechat date: (if known)= > > Summary: Ready for the IESG. There are a few editorial nits noted below > (the example IP addresses need to be fixed). > > Major issues: - > > Minor issues: - > > Nits/editorial comments: > > s3: WLAN is defined but no expansion of the acronym is given. > s5.1: Possibly define/expand PHY. > s5.2, next to last bullet: s/manage/management/ > s5.3, last sentence; expand BSS acronym > s7.2: The paragraph > >> Also, the AC MUST have a mechanism that preserves the value of the >> WLAN Profile Interfaces' ifIndexes in the ifTable at AC reboot. >> >> > is duplicated (last and last but 2). > s8: The IP addresses should be taken from the 'example' ranges (see > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iana-ipv4-examples-01). I don't know > that there is an example MAC address - the RFC Editor should know. > s9: Maybe WLAN and BSS should be expanded here in the descriptions as well. > > > > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
