| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Asa, Thank you for providing input to the
discussion. You bring up some key points on the organization of the document. We
will discuss them in the meeting tomorrow. I have some initial thoughts to add
to the discussion. Your comment on including sections 4-7 as
subsections of each of the usage model sections (3.x.x) raises a fundamental
question on the organization of the document. I had considered structuring the
document in that fashion, but concluded that there would be a lot of repetition
in those sections from model to model. My feeling is that each of the models is
unique in a few aspects of the topology, deployment strategy, attributes of the
RSs uses, etc (sections 4-7), but they are not unique in all of them. For that
reason I think that the document will be more concise if we describe out those
points of uniqueness as part of the description of each usage model (without
creating all of the subsections) and then summarized the complete set of
topologies, deployment strategies, etc. in sections 4-7. I agree with your idea that we have
subsections for significant variations/examples of the major usage models. I
would suggest that we have a common description of the model first, and then
short sections describing the specific examples / variations. Regards, Jerry Sydir From: Asa
Masahito-c22106 [mailto:asa@MOTOROLA.COM] Jerry and all, Thank you for
announcing the ad hoc group discussion. I have a
suggestion on the table of contents or organization of the document. My suggestion is
mainly section three. Suggested TOC is, 3.1 Throughput
Enhancement 3.1.1
Detailed model A 3.1.2
Detailed model B 3.1.3
Detailed model C 3.1.4 .... 3.2.1
Detailed model E 3.2.2
Detailed model F 3.2.3
Detailed model G 3.2.4 .... 3.3.1
Detailed model I 3.3.2
Detailed model J 3.3.3
Detailed model K 3.3.4 .... I would like to
make subsections and make a bit detail model. For example, 3.1.1 detailed
model A could be enhance model at cell edge. 3.1.2 detailed
model B could be enhance model at valley of buildings 3.2.1 could be
enhancement for isolated area and 3.2.2 could be
enhancement at underground. (I like to
define under ground as out of range area even
if it is within the MMR-BS cell) 3.3.1 could be
enhancement at temporally event. Then I would
suggest to discuss - deployment
strategy - mobility - owner ship - topology - link type - RS
type - antenna for each detailed
model. I mean section 4 -
7 should be discussed in section 3. I think collection
of detailed models is the main point of Usage Models document. I would like to
hear your opinion. Best Regards, Asa p.s. I would like to
include 3.4 mobile RS in section 3.1 TP enhancement. Because mobile
RS intends TP increase at inside the public transportation. From: Given the large number of folks interested in the Multihop
Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc group, I’ve decided to follow the suggestions to
use the 802.16 STDS exploder to carry on Ad Hoc group discussions instead of
setting up a separate email list as I had indicated in earlier communications.
Please append the prefix [MMR-AH-UM] to all communications meant for the ad-hoc
group. The first meeting (conference call) of the Ad Hoc group will
be held on Thursday May 25, 2006 from 06:00 – 08:00 (AM) pacific time
(GMT-08:00). Here is the bridge for the meeting: +1 916-356-2663, Bridge:
2, Passcode: 1157820. I have uploaded some slides that I will use to kick off the
meeting to the temporary upload directory. The document title is C80216j-06_UMAH-kick-off.ppt. I have also uploaded a starting version of the harmonized
contribution (the outline) to the same directory. The document title is C80216j-06_UMAHtemp.doc. Please
review this document in advance and bring up any points of disagreement via
email (over this email list) in order to help make the meeting more productive. I’m looking forward to working with all of you to produce a
harmonized usage model contribution. Regards, Jerry Sydir Wireless Networking Lab, Intel Corp. (408) 765 - 2215 |