Re: 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.
> >
> >
>