Re: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Agenda for 6/15/06 Meeting of Multihop Re

Thread Links	Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Dear Asa and all,

For your comment on section 6, I wonder why the big change is really needed at this time.

The group is almost close to be consensus and just discussing about the missing contents as you see in the meeting agenda today.

In addition, since you have not uploaded the proposed text to change, I do not get what the text you want to add or change exactly.

For your comment on RS ownership concerning section 6.2,
I agree with your more clear description of RS ownership than current draft text.

Best regards,

Sungjin Lee

Global Standards & Research Team
Telecommunication R&D Center
Samsung Electronics

OFFICE : +82 31 279 5248
MOBILE : +82 11 223 6603
E-mail : steve.lee@samsung.com sj.lee@ieee.org

From: Asa Masahito-c22106 [mailto:asa@MOTOROLA.COM]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 8:56 AM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Agenda for 6/15/06 Meeting of Multihop Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc Group

Jerry and all,

Sorry for the late response.

Here are my comments for the next conf. call.

1. Reorganization of section 6

I would like to remove RS characteristics.

Instead, my proposal is

6. RS mobility

7. RS Ownership

8. Antenna usage

Main reason of this change is antenna usage includes

BS characteristics as well as RS characteristics.

So I would like to make antenna usage the independent section 8

Lastly I do not want include availability in this document.

It seems more like solution including preferences of service provider.

2. RS Ownership

I would like to make it clear what is ownership is.

I think

- who controls RS

- who installs RS

- who decides place of RS antenna

- who pays for RS equipment

may be considered for infrastructure(provider) or client ownership

My understanding is

- infrastructure (or provider) ownership

*provider controls/installs/decides place of RS

- client ownership

*provider controls RS, user installs/decides place of RS

Best Regards,

Asa

From: Sydir, Jerry [mailto:jerry.sydir@INTEL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 5:33 AM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Agenda for 6/15/06 Meeting of Multihop Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc Group

Agenda:

- Roll call

- Discuss points raised in email discussion:

- Section 6.4 – need to discuss again the level of detail that should be captured in this section

- Section 6 in general – is there any missing content?

- Section 5.3 – proposal to specify that route selection is centralized (from Jen-Shun Yang)

- Discuss any other technical comments on the current draft

- Access the status of the draft – do we have consensus?

- Discuss next steps

o Proposals for additional usage models?

o Wrapping up the editing of the contribution

From: Sydir, Jerry [mailto:jerry.sydir@INTEL.COM]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 9:34 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Announcing 6/15/06 Meeting of Multihop Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc Group

Dear Ad Hoc participants,

The next meeting of the Multihop Relay Usage Model Ad Hoc Group will occur on Thursday June 15, 06:00 – 08:00 PDT (13:00 – 15:00 UTC).

The bridge for the meeting is 916-356-2663, Bridge: 1, Passcode: 4686427

I have updated the draft to include modifications to the outline that we agreed to in the June 8 meeting. It can be found in the following location: http://dot16.org/CSUpload//upload/temp_db/C80216j%2d06_UMAHtemp_r3a.doc .

Please take care to look at the r3a version of the document. There is an r3 version that I had uploaded to the server, but I discovered that I had not made all of the agreed upon modifications, so I created the r3a version.

My plan is to assemble a list of issues that we need to resolve in the next meeting via email discussion before the meeting. Please review the document and bring up issues that you have with the technical content (or missing content) of the document. (Editorial comments are welcome, but we may want to hold off on making editorial changes until we are sure that we are not changing the technical content).

Please send your comments to the list before Wednesday 08:00 PDT. I will assemble a list of issues for us to resolve based on the comments received up to that point. Below is the tentative agenda for the meeting. I will send out an updated agenda on Wednesday.