Access Service Provider - characterized by providing L1&L2 level access and may include some authentication (device authentication; L1&L2 and some L3&L4 capabilities negotiation; L1&L2 authentication). Access Service Network ID is usually analogous to Operator ID in 802.16 or infrastructure based SSID in 802.11. It tells you who you are connecting to, but not necessarily who is authenticating your use.Core Service Provider- characterized by providing L3&L4 level access and almost certainly includes AAA authentication (perhaps device authentication; certainly user/account authentication; some L3&L4 capabilities negotiation). Calling this 'Mobility Service Provider' is really a misnomer. Calling it the Mobility Service Provider is a legacy distinction based on regulatory and marketing, not technical functional. On a technical level, if PMIP, then yes, HA will be in the Core Service Network. But the FA is in the Access Service Network and all actual mobility activity occurs in the ASN, not the CSN. And of course the CSN may very well be a visited CSN, perhaps even likely. Only rationale for calling the CSN the Mobility Service Provider is that the Mobile Station acquires its IP address from the CSN, if PMIP. If no PMIP (CMIP anyone?), it is even clearer. Anyway, mobility occurs in the Access Service Network, not the Core Service Network. Better to make the distinction based on who validates capabilities and authenticates. All should be viewed from the perspective/perception of the Mobile Station. CSN ID is more analogous to ITU E.212 MCC + MNC. MCC + MNC is not great, but it may be regulated anyway. May be required to be transmitted to meet regulatory requirements. Definitely should stay away from using NAI over the air. NAI can be huge; very expensive over the air. And ASN ID and CSN ID could very well be the same for many networks, especially 802.11 and 802.16 fixed/nomadic networks.
Phillip Barber
Chief Scientist
Broadband Wireless Solutions
Huawei Technologies Co., LTD.
From: Ajay RajkumarTo: Junghoon JeeSent: Monday, June 05, 2006 1:10 PMSubject: Re: [802.21] Issue #6 Which operator should we expose in IEs? (doc: 21-06-0667-00-0000_Comment Assignments)Junghoon Jee wrote:[Ajay] I guess you are treating the "core network operator" as the "core transport operator", whereas, I was in fact treating "core operator" as the "home operator" including owning HA in case of MIP.In my view, "core network operator" loosely can be interpreted as the
"mobility service provider", i.e., the operator that owns the user.
Junghoon>> For clarification, the more accurate interpretation about the feature of the mobility service provider is its having a mobility management entity like HA in case of MIP.
However, if one has to look at the most general case of the entities
involved in providing a service to an end host they would be as follows:- Access Service Provider
- Mobility Service Provider
- "Services" Provider
Junghoon>> Well, I am not so sure about the above categorization.
I am more inclined to the definition from the IETF draft that was indicated from the previous message. :-)
Each of the above typically has some level of Authentication/Authorization functionality and depending on the the
network some of these AA functionalities may be optional at an implementation/deployment level.Also, these Authentication/Authorization functions could be delegated to an independent entity. However, in the current networks typically this
is not delegated. Bottomline, the most general case could involve six independent entities.Considering that AA functionality may be integrated by the provider, three entities may still be involved.
Junghoon>> Back to the main issue of which operator information we would expose in IEs...
I am not still questioning to myself about the feasibility and effectiveness of exposing the _core_ operator's information to IEs.
How can a MIH Information Server gather the core operators' information depending on the varying mobile nodes and can pick up the right information for a specific mobile node? Do we have to depend on the seed information like NAI in case of AAA?
Moreover, what benefit can a mobile node expect by receiving the core operator's information in terms of seamless handover?
Any thoughts?
Best Regards,
-Junghoon