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

Re: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Some comments for joint contributions ofusage model

Hi Aimin,

   Thanks for your comments.

I don't mean all mechanisms must be centralized controlled. At least, the HARQ might not appropriate to be centralized controlled.  I merely mean that since 802.16 networking is a connection oriented network, centralized relay path helps the MMR-BS to coordinate information exchanges with numerous RS. Regarding MS handover, I think we can apply your "combined architecture" idea if I didn't misunderstnad your meaning, but there is still no need any routing protocol in each RS because the target RS/BS and original RS/BS have been well determined by MS and/or RS and/or MMR-BS during MS moving.

Best Regards,

Jen-Shun Yang (Tonny Yang)
ITRI/ICL
TEL: +886-3-5914616
email: jsyang@itri.org.tw


Aimin Zhang <zam@huawei.com> -

2006/06/15 03:11 PM

       
        收件人：        "jsyang@ITRI.ORG.TW" <jsyang@ITRI.ORG.TW>,
        副本抄送：        "john_lee@huawei.com" <john_lee@huawei.com>,
        主旨：        Re: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Some comments for joint contributions ofusage model



Hello Jen Shun,

Do you mean a centralized controlled  system architechture? If the number of hops is more than two, there will be a lot of signaling needed to collect necessary information for routing or handover, etc.  Because there are always a lot of MS moving simultaneously from one RS-cell to the other RS-cell, so the signaling overhead might become very huge and a lot of bandwidth will be used .

I think it better to have a combined architechture. The last 2 hops can be centralized controllized by a high capability RS, however, the first few hops from MMR-BS to this RS should be distributed controlled.

In the combined architechture, an MS can be connected to any RS with different capability. However, the intermediate-RS should have better to be high capability to support distributed controlled.

 

Best regards,

Aimin

***************************************************************************************
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!
***************************************************************************************


Hi Saravanan,

  Thanks for your supporting. Actually, I also think the term of "routing" is not appropriate to be adopted in any 802.16j documents, because it is no need to have routing protocol in RS.

What do you think?


Best Regards,

Jen-Shun Yang (Tonny Yang)
ITRI/ICL
TEL: +886-3-5914616
email: jsyang@itri.org.tw

"Saravanan Govindan" <Saravanan.Govindan@sg.panasonic.com> -

2006/06/15 02:07 PM

       
       收件人：        <jsyang@ITRI.ORG.TW>, <STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org>, ..
       副本抄送：        ,
       主旨：        RE: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Some comments for joint contributions of usage model




Hi Jen-Shun,

I agree that a difference between mesh and relay is based on path selection. Centralized relay path helps the MMR-BS coordinate exchanges with the numerous RS.

In particular, I think the revision you propose below addresses this point.

Cheers,

Saravanan Govindan




-----Original Message-----
From: Jen-Shun Yang [mailto:jsyang@ITRI.ORG.TW]
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 1:47 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] [MMR-AH-UM] Some comments for joint contributions of usage model

Dear Jerry,

Thanks for your great efforts.

Regarding the Chapter 5.3 "Types of Routes", I would like to have the
comments as below:

1. To distinguish MMR’s topology from Mesh topology, it is not clear if we
said the MMR’s topology is only tree-like topology; because the mesh
network could be a tree-like topology too.
2. Actually, I think the "centralized relay path selection by MMR-BS" is
the major difference to distinguish MMR’s topology from Mesh topology, and
we should not allow the distributed routing protocols implemented in each
RS due to the connection oriented characteristics in MMR. It will worsen
the complexity if we allow the implementation of distributed routing
protocols.
3. Therefore, I would like to make a revision to the following sentence
written in the second paragraph of chapter 5.3.
Original sentence:
It should be noted that even when multiple routes are enabled between the
RSs, the overall topology is still tree-like because all data
communications are between the MMR-BS and MSs and this usage does not
violate the scope as defined in 802.16j PAR.
Revised sentence:
It should be noted that even when multiple routes are enabled between the
RSs, the overall topology is still tree-like and applying centralized relay
path selection by MMR-BS, because all data communications are between the
MMR-BS and MSs and this usage should not violate the scope as defined in
802.16j PAR.

Best Regards,

Jen-Shun Yang (Tonny Yang)
ITRI/ICL
TEL: +886-3-5914616
email: jsyang@itri.org.tw

本信件可能包含工研院機密資訊，非指定之收件者，請勿使用或揭露本信件內容，並請銷毀此信件。
This email may contain confidential information. Please do not use or disclose it in any way and delete it if you are not the intended recipient.
本信件可能包含工研院機密資訊，非指定之收件者，請勿使用或揭露本信件內容，並請銷毀此信件。
This email may contain confidential information. Please do not use or disclose it in any way and delete it if you are not the intended recipient.



本信件可能包含工研院機密資訊，非指定之收件者，請勿使用或揭露本信件內容，並請銷毀此信件。
This email may contain confidential information. Please do not use or disclose it in any way and delete it if you are not the intended recipient.