Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Harmonization] MBS Harmonization
Dear BJ,
I am not aware that there currently exists a possibility that a BS will not
support the MBS zone in the PHY level, and I'm not sure we want to promote
BS that do not support this very important capability, so I don't think a
negotiation is required.
BR,
Yigal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@listserv.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-802-16-mobile@listserv.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Beomjoon
(BJ) Kim
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 2:03 PM
To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Harmonization] MBS Harmonization
Dear Yong Chang and all involved in MBS
I'm BJ from LG Electronics.
We want to clarify a few things and our position regarding the issue in the
uploaded contribution by Yong Chang.
1) Basically, we agree to that Pre-Advermisement may not be necessary under
the assumption of Macro Diversity.
Therefore, NBR-ADV message may not include MBS Zone ID of neighbor BSs (if
there is no need for an MSS to perform HO under the assumption).
2) However, when an MSS attempts to enter network at a BS, it is necessary
for the MSS to negotiate MBS capability with the BS whether or not the BS
can support MBS based on Macro Diversity. It is because all BSs may not
support MBS with Macro Diversity. So, we have proposed that Mode Support
Indication (MBS support) should be included in REG-REQ/RSP in our
contribution (H80216e-04/01).
3) Also, we have proposed a Backbone message to manage the BSs included in
MBS zone.
We want to hear your opinion about the backbone message.
(Alvarion people seem to think it may be out of scope.)
Additionally, we have a question.
Under the environment where Macro Diversity is supported, we understand that
there is no need for an MSS receiving only MBS traffic to perform Handover
procedures.
However, there may be a case where an MSS starting to receive MBS traffic
from BS 1 moves to BS 2.
In this case, BS 2 does not know the MSS is in its coverage because the MSS
did not perform HO procedures.
In this situation,
Q1: If there is DL traffic addressed to the MSS, how can either BS1 or BS2
trasmits the traffic to the MSS without any session information of the MSS?
If the MSS is in Idle Mode when the DL traffic arrives (at this time the DL
traffic will arrive at BS1), the DL traffic may be delivered to the MSS
using the existing procedures of Idle Mode.
However, if the MSS is in Normal Mode or Sleep Mode, it is impossible to
deliver the traffic to the MSS.
Q2: If the MSS has UL traffic to transmit, should the MSS perform Initial
Network Entry at BS2?
Thank you
Regards,
BJ
----- Original Message -----
From: <owner-stds-802-16-mobile@listserv.ieee.org>
To: <STDS-802-16-MOBILE@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 4:44 PM
Subject: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Harmonization] MBS Harmonization
> All,
>
> I have uploaded the initial draft for MBS Harmonization on the upload
> server.
> I showed in this draft how many comments on MBS were given.
>
> For conference call of MBS only, what I heard from the chair of
> Harmonization is that
>
> Time: August 5(Thursday), 3:30 PM (PST)
> Bridge Information: Chair will give information ASAP.
>
> If anyone have a contribution with MBS, then please upload it on the
server
> before the meeting.
>
> Thank,
>
> Yong Chang/Ph.D
> Samsung Electronics, LTD
>
>
>