One document matched: draft-cheng-capwap-classifications-00.txt


                                                  
Internet Draft                                                 H. Cheng 
                                                            S. Govindan 
Document: Functionality Classifications for    Panasonic Singapore Labs 
Control and Provisioning of Wireless Access 
Points 
Expires: August 2004                                      February 2004 
    
    
       Functionality Classifications for Control and Provisioning of 
                      Wireless Access Points (CAPWAP) 
                 draft-cheng-capwap-classifications-00.txt  
    
    
Status of this Memo 
    
   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1].  
    
   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that      
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts. 
    
   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 
    
   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 
        http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 
   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 
        http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 
    
    
Abstract 
    
   This document presents a means for classifying wireless local area 
   network (WLAN) functionality for the Control and Provisioning of 
   Wireless Access Points framework. It also puts forth the advantages 
   of using consistent classifications in dividing functionality between 
   the Access Controllers and Access Points that make up a WLAN. 
 
 
Conventions used in this document 
    
   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [2]. 
    
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 1] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
    
Table of Contents 
    
   1. Introduction...................................................3 
   2. WLAN Functionality Classifications.............................4 
   3. Need for Classifications.......................................5 
   4. Conclusion.....................................................6 
   Security Considerations...........................................7 
   References........................................................7 
   Author's Addresses................................................7 
   Intellectual Property.............................................7 
   Full Copyright Statement..........................................8 
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 2] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
 
1. Introduction 
    
   Wireless local area networks (WLANs) have generated tremendous 
   interests among both consumers and the industry. Consequently, 
   developments in this field are fast-paced and are taken up by a 
   number of participants. As with any process that involves diversified 
   participation, developments in WLAN technologies have led to the 
   introduction of different types of devices, architectures and 
   strategies. Although these advancements are based on the standardized 
   IEEE 802.11 specifications, they nonetheless present a host of 
   incompatibility issues that ultimately affect the end market.  
    
   A particular example of such incompatibility is related to WLAN 
   architectures that incorporate centralized controller entities or 
   Access Controllers (ACs). ACs were introduced to simplify the 
   deployment and management of large-scale WLANs by aggregating control 
   of a number of Access Points (APs) at a single controller entity. 
   Additionally, designs for these entities include consolidating some 
   WLAN functionality at the ACs and leaving the remaining to the APs.   
    
   While such division of functionality among APs and ACs is widely 
   endorsed, the specifics in which they are accomplished vary among 
   manufacturers and their implementations. These differences introduce 
   complications for consumers and enterprises, which in turn adversely 
   affects WLAN adoption.  
    
   This document presents a means for classifying WLAN functions based 
   on operational similarities. The functionality may then be divided 
   between ACs and APs on the basis of the classifications.  
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 3] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
    
2. WLAN Functionality Classifications 
 
   Table 1 illustrates means for classifying WLAN functionality.  
    
    
   --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
   | Type | Type           | Constituent         | Justifications      | 
   |      | Description    | Functions           |                     | 
   --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
   | 1    | Radio          | Transmission/       | Functionality common|  
   |      | Frequency (RF) | Reception,          | to the RF interface | 
   |      |                | Coding,             | are to be placed    |  
   |      |                | Modulation,         | together. This makes| 
   |      |                | Power control,      | for easier design   | 
   |      |                | Wireless interface  | and operation.      | 
   |      |                | monitoring,         |                     | 
   |      |                | Beacon control      |                     | 
   |      |                |                     |                     |  
   | 2    | L2 Processing  | Authentication,     | Functionality common|  
   |      |                | Association,        | to the MAC layer are|   
   |      |                | Encryption/         | to be classified    | 
   |      |                | Decryption,         | together so that L2 |              
   |      |                | Bridging            | PDUs are processed  |  
   |      |                |                     | in one unit. This   |  
   |      |                |                     | follows from the    | 
   |      |                |                     | established ISO-OSI | 
   |      |                |                     | layering.           |         
   |      |                |                     |                     | 
   | 3    | L3 Processing  | QoS processing,     | Functionality common|  
   |      |                | Routing,            | to the IP layer are | 
   |      |                | IP processing       | to be classified    | 
   |      |                |                     | together so that    | 
   |      |                |                     | processing of L3    |        
   |      |                |                     | PDUs may be         | 
   |      |                |                     | consolidated in one | 
   |      |                |                     | functional unit.    | 
   |      |                |                     |                     | 
   | 4    | Control        | Policy management,  | General control is  |  
   |      |                | Parameter settings, | common to all APs.  |  
   |      |                | Configuration,      | As such, these are  | 
   |      |                | QoS management      | to be aggregated.   | 
   |      |                | Access control      |                     | 
   --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    
                                Table 1  
    
    
    
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 4] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
    
   The functionality types are classified based on their relations to 
   the ISO-OSI protocol layers. Functionality type 1, Radio Frequency 
   (RF), relates to those functional aspects that are common to the RF 
   interface between an AP and a mobile client. This is the physical 
   layer. Next, L2 processing relates to the subsequent MAC layer while 
   type 3 L3 processing deals with the network layer. Finally, type 4 
   functionality combines control aspects that are common to all APs.     
    
   The advantage of such classifications is that it is based on well 
   established concepts of protocol layering. This ensures that the 
   execution of different types of functionality may be optimized in 
   independent and efficient ways. And with the expected growth in WLAN 
   load levels, optimal performance of network entities becomes a 
   significant priority. 
    
   It is quite obvious from the table that the Type 2 functions 
   corresponds to the MAC layer functions defined by the IEEE802.11. 
   Therefore, it would be possible that the functions to be split in 
   further detail. For example, the security part, e.g. 802.11i, and the 
   QoS control part, e.g. 802.11e, could be separate as Type 2A, Type 2B 
   etc. But this kind of split of the IEEE802.11 MAC function needs to 
   be rectified by the IEEE. The general principle is that the split 
   functions could operate separately.  
    
    
3. Need for Classifications 
    
   The classifications of WLAN functionality represent the integral 
   units that may be implemented in ACs and APs as parts of their WLAN 
   service capabilities. As such, enterprises may choose for example, 
   APs comprising types 1, 2 and 4 functionalities and a corresponding 
   controller capable of type 3 IP processing. Alternatively, APs may be 
   simplified to realize only type 1 RF functionality while a 
   sophisticated AC realizes the other remaining types of 
   functionalities. This follows from the prevailing trend where ACs 
   aggregate some WLAN functionality leaving only the remaining for the 
   APs, albeit in a structured manner.  
    
   As such, standardized means of classifications allow for consistency 
   in addressing various types of WLAN devices and divisions. This leads 
   to increased flexibility in designs for ACs and APs. Such flexibility 
   in turn ensures that different market requirements are addressed in 
   efficient and focused ways. So in addition to providing various 
   options for dividing functionality, the classifications also promote 
   interoperability between different types of devices.  
    
   The classifications also form a based for identifying different types 
   of APs, ACs and their compatibilities. For example, APs incorporating 
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 5] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
   functionality types 1 and 2 would require support from a 
   corresponding types 3 and 4 AC or from a set of ACs of types 3 and 4. 
   In essence, the classifications present opportunities for 
   certification processes between APs and ACs.     
    
4. Conclusion 
    
   The classifications for WLAN functionalities presented so far need to 
   be realized as part of the CAPWAP effort. Doing so would allow for 
   ease and flexibility in WLAN deployments. Also, establishing a 
   consistent means of classifications would ensure interoperability 
   between different types of APs and ACs from different manufacturers. 
   Additionally, it presents opportunities to optimize network entities 
   so as to deliver performance commensurate with WLAN needs and 
   expectations. There is also a need for devising appropriate policies 
   for dividing functionality among ACs and APs which would further 
   simplify the deployment of WLANs comprising different types of 
   devices with varying types of functionality.   
    
   These aspects would give manufacturers greater flexibility in 
   designing their products knowing that they would be compatible with 
   devices from other manufacturers. Similarly, consumers gain with the 
   flexibility in choosing and deploying equipment suited to their 
   particular needs.  
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 6] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
    
    
    
    
    
Security Considerations 
 
   Security is an integral issue to CAPWAP. As such, the aspects put 
   forth in this document will base their security requirements on that 
   of the broader CAPWAP goals.  
    
    
    
References 
 
   1  "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, October 
      1996, <RFC 2026> 
    
   2  "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 
      14, March 1997, <RFC 2119> 
    
    
Author's Addresses 
    
   Hong Cheng 
   Panasonic Singapore Laboratories Pte Ltd 
   Blk 1022 Tai Seng Ave #06-3530 
   Tai Seng Industrial Estate 
   Singapore 534415 
   Phone: (+65) 6554 5477 
   Email: hcheng@psl.com.sg 
    
   Saravanan Govindan 
   Panasonic Singapore Laboratories Pte Ltd 
   Blk 1022 Tai Seng Ave #06-3530 
   Tai Seng Industrial Estate 
   Singapore 534415 
   Phone: (+65) 6554 5441 
   Email: sgovindan@psl.com.sg 
    
    
    
    
Intellectual Property  
 
   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 
   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to   
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 7] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 
   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 
   has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of 
   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of 
   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to 
   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such 
   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can 
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 
 
   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice 
   this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 
   Director. 
 
 
Full Copyright Statement 
 
   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 
 
   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 
   English. 
 
   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. 
 
   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION   
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 8] 
Internet-Draft      Functionality Classifications       February 2004 
 
 
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 
  
 
 
H. Cheng                Expires - August 2004                [Page 9] 

PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 05:42:11