Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] [Harmonization] MBS Harmonization
Dear Yigal
You mean that every BS will be able to support Macro Diversity in PHY level.
Am I right? If so, we agree with you in that the negotiation procedures are not necessary.
Also, if you have another comment or answer, please give me a feedback.
Thank you
Regards,
BJ
----- Original Message -----
From: <owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
To: <STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 10:40 AM
Subject: 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
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>