I’m forwarding comments on the r1
draft of the usage model document made by Gamini. (Sorry for the delay in
forwarding this to the list).
Regards,
Jerry
From: Gamini Senarath
[mailto:gamini@nortel.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:09
PM
To: Sydir,
Jerry
Cc: Peiying Zhu
Subject: FW: Re: [STDS-802-16]
[MMR-AH-UM] Announcing 6/1/06 Meeting of Multihop Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc
Group
Hi Jerry,
I subscribed to the mailing list but it looks like the system
does not allow me to post.
So, I wil send these comments to you. I apprecaite if you can
pelase forward it to the group.
Thanks,
Gamini
-----Original
Message-----
From: Senarath, Gamini
[CAR:RA12:EXCH]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:58 PM
To: 'STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org'
Subject:
Re:
[STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Announcing 6/1/06 Meeting of Multihop Relay Usage
Model Ad Hoc Group
Jerry and all,
Some comments from me are provided below.
Section : 3,
- 3.1 Replace
"specific areas" in Line 2 with "areas which are not
sufficiently covered in the cell".
(rationale: the areas
with insufficient data rates can exist in any part of the cell)
- "to improve
coverage, capacity and throughput to users" may be replaced with
"to improve coverage, capacity or per user throughput"
- Then add another
usage model to cover the range extension scenario
(Rationale: we may need a
separate usage model to cover the areas outside the cell range (expansion of
the cell area). Mobiles there may not be able to communicate with the BS (even
for exchanging control information). So the suggested text is:
3.5 RANGE EXTENSION USAGE
MODEL:
In this usage model, cellular service
is extended to the areas outside the coverage area using infra-structure relays
(mainly operator- deployed). It provides a fixed access link to MS/SS devices
located outside cell coverage area. The BS has sufficient capacity to
accommodate the new traffic. Outside area is not covered by any other BSs. This
scenario may exist in rural areas and providing additional BSs would be
prohibitive given the small number of additional users added to the system.
There may be single or multiple hop relays.
Section 4:
Since
throughput actually means "Per user throughput" we may state as such
in order not to get confused with aggregate throughput.
- 4.1
Throughput/Capacity may be replaced by "Per User Throughput and/or
Capacity"
- 4.2 Coverage/Range
may be replaced by "Coverage and/or Range"
Section 5. TOPOLOGY:
- The MRS here referes
to a Mobile Relay Station. We may need to be more explicit by stating
relays fixed in taxis, trains, busses etc. In order not to get confused
with terminals with relaying capacity which is not included in the PAR)
- In my view, the
number of hops for the relays in multiple user mobile platforms need not
be limited to 2.
Rationale: A bus (a mbile
platform) with a relay going under a tunnel may connect to the BS via another
relay located inside tunnel. Another example is that, there may be multiple
relays inside a train which are linked to each other etc.
Section 6:
- 6.1.1 On Roof Top
(need to be added as a separate category).
- 6.1.3 Opportunities:
Last sentence on performance may be deleted.
Section 7:
- Antenna usage (7.4)
may not be necessary (too technical details) . So my suggestion is to include this description in the
technical requirements document and include here a general statement to
say that different possibilities of antenna types might lead to different
solutions.
Regards,
Gamini
------------------------
Gamini Senarath
Wireless Technology Labs
Nortel Networks