IEEE 802.11 Medium Access Control (MAC) Profile for Control and Provisioning of Wireless Access Points (CAPWAP)
draft-ietf-opsawg-capwap-hybridmac-08
Yes
(Benoît Claise)
No Objection
(Adrian Farrel)
(Alia Atlas)
(Alissa Cooper)
(Barry Leiba)
(Brian Haberman)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Pete Resnick)
(Richard Barnes)
(Spencer Dawkins)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
(was Discuss)
No Objection
No Objection
(2014-12-10 for -07)
Unknown
Thank you for addressing the SecDir review: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg05260.html
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Richard Barnes Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -07)
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2014-12-15 for -07)
Unknown
- intro, last para: Figure 1's last row says "WTP" in the Local MAC column, but the text here implies that it should say AC - what am I getting wrong? - sec cons. saying WAP and AC messages "is encrypted" is not quite what you want - I think you need to say that those messages have origin authentication and data integrity (which they should have if "encrypted" properly, and if they're not that not this doc's fault).
Ted Lemon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2014-12-16 for -07)
Unknown
Does the abstract really need to be as long as it is? Wouldn't it be sufficient to say something like this? The CAPWAP protocol binding for IEEE 802.11 defines two MAC modes for IEEE 802.11 WTP: Split and Local MAC. In the Split MAC mode, the partitioning of encryption/decryption functions are not clearly defined. This leads to interoperability issues, especially when the Access Controller (AC) and Wireless Transmission Point (WTP) come from different vendors. To prevent interoperability issues, this specification defines an IEEE 802.11 MAC profile message element in which each profile specifies an unambiguous division of encryption functionality between the WTP and AC. I think this is sufficient information for people to figure out what the purpose of the document is, and then people who are interested in the stated problem will read the document. The other information in the abstract seems unnecessary, and increases the workload of the reader who is deciding whether or not the document is something they need to read based on the abstract.