Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] Things to clarify and suggestions.
Dear HO ad hoc group:
Yes, there could be lots of misunderstandings and lacks of understanding
what we defined terminology and the taxonomy of HO that we will treat in
this month. I hope this email may clarify all even though it¡¯s almost
impossible.
In this email, I would answer Ronny¡¯s questions one by one based upon my
understandings.
Q1. The base assumption of a single BTS is that a BTS covers only one
sector and each sector may have a different frequency.
Obviously, the table shows a different story on it. It is due to that the
base assumption is too specific to cover all network deployment scenarios.
Hence, although we take the base assumption, we might need more complex
network architecture, which reduces the HO delays if appropriately
designed. In this case, you might regard the base assumption as an
extension to multi-sectored BTS.
Q2. Just the BTS don¡¯t know which FA the neighboring BTS have.
Q3. ¡±Basic ¡° scenarios cover up to level 2 backbone communications, while
¡°advanced¡± supports up to level 3 communications.
Q4. Again, the same principle. The taxonomy provides the extended scope of
the HO scenarios. This means some network may be deployed with frequency
reuse 1.
Q5. I think this part needs further discussion within the ad hoc group,
too.
Q6. Again, the same principle. This takes place only when the frequency
reuse is 1.
Q7. MBS doesn¡¯t have any issues related to HO. Check again, please.
I hope this helps the folks of the HO ad hoc group.
Best regards,
Jung-Won Kim.
---------------------------------------------------------
Jung-Won Kim, Ph.D.
Senior Engineer
NTP SystemLab. 1
Telecommunication Systems Division
Telecommunication Network
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Office: +82-31-279-3366
Mobile: +82-10-9530-3356
Email: <mailto:jungwon74.kim@samsung.com> jungwon74.kim@samsung.com
---------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG [mailto:owner-stds-802-16-
mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of ronnykim
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 8:03 AM
To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] Things to clarify and suggestions.
Dear all
Regarding the base documents, I have suggestions and things to clarify.
I think AAS HO should be considered in 802.16e. Thus, I have added one more
scenario and assumption on the list (marked in red).
I have suggested 5 possible handover scenarios with IP change
consideration. I want to hear your opinion on this.
(I have uploaded "C802.16e-04_105_0601" on the FTP server
http://upload.wirelessman.org in handoff ad hoc directory)
I have several things to clarify.
1. Does minimal assumption 1 and 2 "HO occurs between single sector BTS and
Each sector is at a different frequency" mean that one BS only can have one
sector?
If so, this doesn't comply with the Assumption of Intra BTS HO with
multiple sectors on the table. This assumption seems to me that either one
BTS has more than one sector or more than one FA.
2. Does minimal assumption 3 "FA is unknown" mean that we will only
consider 1 FA case or we have to consider all possible cases?
3. Please someone clarify what are the differences between Basic and
Advanced?
4. Which case does Scenario name "Basic-Same-freq" and assumption "HO
between sectors at the same frequency" represent?
It seems to me this doesn't comply with the minimal assumption 2 "Each
sector is at a different frequency".
5. Can basic/Advanced-MIMO be discussed without a consideration of
different technologies?
6. If two base stations use different frequencies, how soft handover is
possible?
7. Is MBS issue out of scope of handoff Ad hoc, even though MBS is related
to the handoff?
I think we need to unify the terminology on the base document, e.g. use BS
instead of BTS.
Regards,
Ronny(Yong-Ho) Kim
LG Electronics