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

RE: [802.21] Network Controlled Handover and IS



> It seems both STA controlled and network-controlled scenarios 
> may have to considered in 802.21.  It may seem unfair to the 
> network operator who owns the radio resources in one or more 
> technology for allowing its subscribers' STA to make decision 
> that may cause misuse of  radio resources.  

Basically, STA can make a decision to handover only where it has a
subscription to that network.
The resource that is allowed for a STA is managed by the network operator
without question.
For network-controlled inter-technology handover,
network (entity) may continuously gather or monitor the status of the STA
through MIH ES or CS 
to make a handover decision for a certain STA, and another STA and ,,,
This is my point. I expect that anyone could solve or lessen my concerning
point.
I think that it may not be a problem that can be solved by reducing
signaling transaction from 10 to 5.

One the other 
> hand, a STA that has no subscription or roaming relation to 
> the networks in question may make its own decision. It is not 
> difficult to have both these mechanisms co-exist.

If a STA has no subscription or roaming relation to networks,
then it cannot access that network. Can you make more clarification on your
point ?

Regards,
Junghoon

> BR,
> Srinivas Sreemanthula
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Phillip Barber [mailto:pbarber@BROADBANDMOBILETECH.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:09 PM
> To: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [802.21] Network Controlled Handover and IS
> 
> 
> I must agree with Junghoon Jee. It simplifies matters 
> tremendously, and decreases non-productive management and 
> control messaging on the air interface dramatically, to have 
> the MS play a more intrinsic role in inter-technology 
> handover decision (mobility policy engine locus of control).
>  
> Thanks,
> Phillip Barber
> Huawei
>  
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> 
> From: Junghoon Jee <mailto:jhjee@ETRI.RE.KR>
> To: Stefano M. Faccin <mailto:stefano.faccin@NOKIA.COM>  ; 
> STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 11:28 AM
> Subject: RE: Re: [802.21] Network Controlled Handover and IS
> 
> Hi Vivek and Stefano,
>  
> [Vivek G Gupta]
> Many of the existing media specific technologies already do 
> this in some form. For example 802.11k provides access to 
> link layer measurements like Bit Rate, BER, etc. that you 
> mention above. Other media specific technologies also have a 
> provision for something similar.
> Given that, do we need any additional methods/primitives or 
> capabilities from 802.21 for above?
> 
> [[Stefano] ]  I think the answer is completely depending on 
> the use scenarios. Let's assume a 3GPP network operator owns 
> multiple accesses, such as 802.11 and 802.16 in addition to 
> the 3GPP specific access networks. Let's assume the operator 
> is interested in having network controlled HO e.g. for load 
> sharing or other reasons that require stricter control that 
> the one granted by simply controlling the policies in the 
> terminal used to decide HO between technologies. In such 
> case, it may be difficult in practical implementations to 
> have an MME function in the network that relies on existing 
> L2 technology-specific to collect the information. it pretty 
> much implies a tight IW of the various radio interfaces/ANs 
> at L2, that may not be that easy to implement nor that 
> acceptable to 3GPP operators/vendors. In such scenario, using 
> 802.21 at "L3 and above" to allow reporting of information to 
> the MIHF in an MME that is used to control inter-technology 
> HO may be an easy and clean way to!
>   go. I see this as a very relevant scenario for "L3 and above" MIH.
> 
> =>
> [Junghoon]
> I tend to agree about the scenario that Stefano mentioned as 
> a general application of MIH.
> However, I have some concern regarding the network-initiated 
> inter-technology handover.
> To support not one or two mobile terminals, overloading of 
> MIH _handover_ control entity by enormous MIH events and commands...
> IMO, it would be better to let a mobile terminal have a brain 
> about inter-technology handover decision.
>  
>   
> <http://umail.etri.re.kr/External_ReadCheck.aspx?email=STDS-80
> 2-21@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG&name=STDS-802-21%40LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG&fr
omemail=jhjee@etri.re.kr&messageid=%3Cb46e0bdb-3aab-482e-8237-1d7beb70f31a@e
tri.re.kr%> 3E>