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

Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] 6/10 telecon meeting minutes



Title: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] 6/10 telecon meeting minutes
Dear Jay Jin and all,
 
I do not believe your reply addresses my comment regarding the use of NBR-ADV information during initial network entry to facilitate discovery.  During network entry, the MSS is interested in the availability and channel of the variety of other Neighbor BS in the area, without necessarily having to scan all available channels.  Having this information in NBR-ADV provides this information.  Also, you assume that during HO, co-located Neighbor BS of differing frequencies will have the same RF performance envelope.  This is certainly not always going to be true.  It is simply much easier to leave the Neighbor DCD delta information in the NBR-ADV broadcast message and  provide this useful information.  Your argument is true in some cases, but not enough to overcome the need to supply the information for other uses.
 
Thanks,
Phil
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 5:19 AM
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] 6/10 telecon meeting minutes

Dear Phil and all..
 
I saw Phil's comments previous e-mail answer.
 
see my comments in-line with green color
 
Thanks
 
jay jin
 


From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG [mailto:owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 5:47 PM
To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] 6/10 telecon meeting minutes

 
See my comments in-line.
 
Thanks,
Phil
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Handoff] 6/10 telecon meeting minutes

Dear Jong-won Kim  and all
 
 I received the result conference call result in this morning .
 
 see  my comment in-line

Please check it out and let me know your opinion.

 thanks.

 Regards,

jay jin 
 
 
 Scenario: Inter-sector HO where BS ID of serving and target BS is assumed to be the same:
(Diff. freq, same FFT size, same IP subnet/prefix, no AAS)

This is one of the basic scenarios. From a scrub of pending contributions, the following contribution (available in temporary upload directory) seems applicable:

* method to reduce a munber of scanning.pdf

We did not discuss this contribution. Action item for the group is to review this draft prior to the next telecon.  

Above contribution is the case that BSs may be enough close to have same coverage and share MAC resource among them. 

If serving BS advertise all BSs in above case, It could be wasted. Because BSs in the same coverage transmit similar power. MSS need not to scan all BSs in the same coverage. 

So  in my opinion, the neighbor BS_ID can be represent all BSs  that are belong to a same coverage 

No. The channel information broadcast in NBR-ADV and contained in the DCD for differing Neighbor BS (logical or physical) are also used by MSS during power-up/initial network entry so that they do not have to scan all available channels.  An MSS can synchronize with a given BS, listen for the periodic NBR-ADV (on average will have to wait 500ms), and get information on all Neighbor BS.  This is can be a very handy feature.  Your example only deals with HO use of the data. 

 

jay)    I also think serving BS advertise information of Neighbor BSs in NBR-ADV message.  but  in my opinion, when neighbor BSs have same feature ( e.g.  if neighbor BSs transmit same power ( same coverage) ), MSS doesn't need to measure channel quality all neighbor BSs.  so I think that advertisement of one of neighbor BSs can be enough. ( e.g. during  the scanning period, MSS measures channel quality of advertised neighbor BS's. since neighbor BSs in the same coverage give the similar quality, serving BS advertise just one of neighbor BSs through the NBR-ADV message )

 

 Scenario: Inter-sector HO where it does not matter if serving and target BS ID are same or different:
(Diff. freq, same FFT size, same IP subnet/prefix, no AAS)

There are several contributions (including ones promised) that potentially fall into this category. They are listed below with updates based on the telecon:

* 04/87r1, 04/105_enhanced HO reentry, Phil's planned contribution on optimizing invited ranging, skipping SBC-REQ/RSP, skip PKM REQ-RSP, skip REG REQ/RSP, skip IP addrress acquisition

Group agreed that these 3 contributions should be harmonized to address the following: Definitions of levels of backbone information sharing/communication, grouping of functions during network (re)entry and how levels map to such groupings, under what conditions can certain MSS - BS network entry functions be skipped or optimized and how, how will an MSS 'discover' the level of backbone information sharing supported by a serving and target BS and format and content of information that is shared at each level. Transport of such information between a serving and target BS will not be discussed for now. It may also be possible to combine this with the previous contribution - method to reduce a munber of scanning.pdf  

* 105_Inter-sector HO, 04/58
Action Item: Jung-won to attempt to harmonize these 2 contributions prior to next telecon 

 Between the contribution of 105_Inter-sector HO and my contribution of "method to reduce a number of scanning" ,  there is a small difference in the advertisement of Neighbour  BS ID.

In contribution of 105..., they suggest that serving BS advertise the preamble intex of every neighbor BS,

but in my contribution, under the assumption that neighbor BSs share MAC resource with the same coverage, they have the same Basestation ID so that they may be classified by Sector_ID or FA_ID, etc.  Therefore, a neighbor BS_ID can represent all BSs that are belong to a neighbor. 

I think we need discuss small difference.