Re: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Comments on Multihop Relay Usage Modeldraft
From Gamini's email below:
"Section 5. TOPOLOGY: In my view, the number of hops for the relays in
multiple user mobile platforms need not be limited to 2.".
I agree to this and have previously given a similar comment to Section 3.4.
rgds,
Peng-Yong Kong
-----Original Message-----
From: Sydir, Jerry [mailto:jerry.sydir@INTEL.COM]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 12:48 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Comments on Multihop Relay Usage Model
draft
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