Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [NETMAN_SG] contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID



Agreed.

Thanks,
Phil

----- Original Message -----
From: "Johnston, Dj" <dj.johnston@INTEL.COM>
To: <stds-802-16@IEEE.ORG>
Cc: "stds-802-21" <stds-802-21@IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [NETMAN_SG] contributions for upcoming May
2004 meeting - ARID


> Phil,
> This is in line with my thinking. 802.21 will define a range of
> information that it can pass around and 802.16, amongst others, will be
> free to pick and choose from that information, the things that it wants
> to make available at a lower layer. The ARID and operator ID are two
> obvious candidates. The benefit of this being that the information will
> be commonly defined across heterogeneous systems, even if media specific
> transports are used at the end of the day.
>
> If we can pull it together in time, I hope that we can bring to the May
> 802.21 meeting a first pass at structure and coding of such information.
>
> DJ
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Phillip
> Barber
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:26 PM
> To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] contributions for upcoming May 2004
> meeting - ARID
>
>
> In 16e, we know that we are going to have to expand the NBR-ADV beacon
> to include other information elements that are currently not required to
> meet a single operator, single network concept--16e's current mandate.
> As we look at multiple 16e networks, and even multiple non-16e 802 and
> other networks interacting, going forward we are going to have to do
> some additions to NBR-ADV beacon (Operator ID anyone?) in 16e.  We are
> looking to 21 to develop a common set of information elements needed for
> broadcast in the beacon to facilitate these activities.
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sungjin Lee" <steve.lee@samsung.com>
> To: "'S. Daniel Park'" <soohong.park@samsung.com>; "'McCann, Stephen'"
> <stephen.mccann@ROKE.CO.UK>; "'stds-802-21'" <stds-802-21@IEEE.ORG>
> Cc: <ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM>; "'Pyungsoo Kim'" <kimps@samsung.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 7:47 PM
> Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
>
>
> > Hi Daniel, Stephen and all HO guys
> >
> > In my understanding, that kind of issue (e.g. ARID into beacon) is fit
>
> > to
> be
> > discussed within 802.21.
> > The ARID formant, recommended usage examples and scenarios also could
> > be discussed and then put into the documentation released as 802.21
> > spec. based on agreement between 802.21 attendees.
> >
> > However, the specific way to provide that ARID information over the
> > air interface should be discussed within each WG. In fact, It sould be
>
> > discussed within 802.11 WG to propose the changed Beacon frame
> > structure including ARID and within 802.16 to propose the changed
> > DL-MAP or NBR-ADV message including ARID.
> >
> > Let me know if I misunderstanding something from the Stephen's
> > comments
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Sungjin Lee
> > =====================================
> > Global Standards & Research Team
> > Telecommunication R&D Center
> > SAMSUNG Electronics
> >
> > TEL : +82 31 279 5248
> > MOBILE : +82 16 301 6603
> > E-mail : steve.lee@samsung.com ======================================
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of S. Daniel
> > Park
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 8:38 AM
> > To: 'McCann, Stephen'; 'stds-802-21'
> > Cc: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM; 'S. Daniel Park'; 'Pyungsoo Kim'
> > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
> >
> > Stephen, thanks your kindly comments on this work.
> >
> > I agree what you said, this solution can be applied for several
> > wireless environments and I really hope it will be expanded to related
>
> > WG as you stated 802.11 WIEN SG.
> >
> > I am deeply considering what approach is more general as 802.21 guys
> > indicated and also waiting for various comments/feedbacks on this
> > work.
> >
> > > However, the way that this information is communicated, be that over
>
> > > a 802.11, 802.16, other air interface will be technology specific
> > > and should really be discussed within the WG in charge of
> > > standardising that technology.
> >
> > Regarding this comment, could you explain it more detail ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > - Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
> > - Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: McCann, Stephen [mailto:stephen.mccann@roke.co.uk]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:36 AM
> > > To: 'S. Daniel Park'; 'stds-802-21'
> > > Cc: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM
> > > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
> > >
> > >
> > > Daniel,
> > >       This is a very interesting issue, and I think it may be
> > > applicable to more than one WG.
> > >
> > > The information that you would want to make available at the APs
> > > (e.g. the ARID) is something that would seem to fit within the scope
>
> > > of 802.21, where the benefits of having a generic identifier that
> > > can be used over different technologies to support this L2/L3
> > > handover distinction and what format this information should take
> > > can be discussed.
> > >
> > > However, the way that this information is communicated, be that over
>
> > > a 802.11, 802.16, other air interface will be technology specific
> > > and should really be discussed within the WG in charge of
> > > standardising that technology.
> > >
> > > Within 802.11 this issue would be welcome within 802.11 WIEN SG.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > >
> > > Stephen
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: S. Daniel Park [mailto:soohong.park@SAMSUNG.COM]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 11:50 AM
> > > > To: ajayrajkumar@LUCENT.COM; 'stds-802-21'
> > > > Cc: 'S. Daniel Park'
> > > > Subject: RE: contributions for upcoming May 2004 meeting - ARID
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi all
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > At the previous meeting on March, I presented one issue which
> > > > dealt with unclear handover indication between L2 and L3 and this
> > > > solution defined a new ARID (Access Router ID) into the beacon to
> > > > distinguish L2 handover from L3 handover. If different ARID, it
> > > > means subnet change, then L3 handover is performed.
> > > >
> > > > The subject was as below:
> > > > Awareness of the handover to be distinguished from a L2 or L3.
> > > >
> > > > I remember that chair and some guys required more general solution
>
> > > > to solve this problem in the 802.11 and they worried about the
> > > > newly defined value into the current 802.11 beacon, however I am
> > > > still wondering how we can solve this ambiguous operation without
> > > > 802.11 spec. extension like ARID or similar value.
> > > >
> > > > So I am open to listen some comments/views on this issue.
> > > >
> > > > My major question is that
> > > > [1] Do I have to propose this solution to the 802.11 WG since this
>
> > > > problem is originated from the 802.11 spec. ?
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > [2] Is this 802.21 WG is right place to deat with this issue ?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > - Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
> > > > - Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Visit our website at www.roke.co.uk
> > >
> > > Registered Office: Roke Manor Research Ltd, Siemens House, Oldbury,
> > > Bracknell, Berkshire. RG12 8FZ
> > >
> > > The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is
> > > confidential to Roke Manor Research Ltd and must not be passed to
> > > any third party without permission. This communication is for
> > > information only and shall not create or change any contractual
> > > relationship.
> > >
> > >
> >
>