[STDS-802-16] [Relay TG] [Forwarding ad-hoc]Summary of the 1st CC - 02 Nov
Hello All,
This is a summary of the Call conference of TGj Ad-hoc Group #1 (Topics: Forwarding, QoS).
The call was held on Friday GMT 12:00 - 14:00 (= Friday 7 am Central, 8 am Eastern, 9 pm Korea/Japan, 8 pm China).
Attendees
G.Q Wang, Rakesh Taori, Hyunjeong Kang, Jeff Tao, Ranga Reddy,
Jerry Sydir, JunHong Hui, Israfil Bahceci, Chie Ming, Hua-Chiang Yin,
Keiichi Nakatsugawa, Masato Okuda, Yousuf Saifullah, Haihong Zheng
Background:
After excluding the comments already addressed in the September meeting, and excluding the comments handled by the chair team, about 100 remaining comments hav been assigned to AhG #1.
The aim of the meeting was to go through three set of comments:
First set: Those comments where all AhG members who chose to respond to e-mail of 29th Oct recommended an "Accept".
Second set: Path management (Section 6.3.2.3.10 through 6.3.2.3.14).
Third set: FOrwarding modes (Section 6.3.3.8)
----------------
The first set contained 18 comments. There were no objections to recommending those as "Accepted" by the Ad-hoc Group except 482. So the 17 out of the 18 that were recommended as "Accepted" during the call are:
186 thru 196, 470, 477, 478, 491, 492, 840, 847
AI-1 (Rakesh): Rakesh to suggest the modified text for comment 482 for others to review (This, if accepted will resolve 482, and supercede 474).
----------------
Then we discussed the second set of comments that deal with Service flow management. These were:
246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 253, 259, 260, 261, 265, 267, 272
Document 485r6 (prepared by Haihong and Hyunjeong) was uploaded to the temp database and later sent to the AhG members by e-mail (due to problems on the temp server). Haihong explained the document briefly. People had not had enough time to go through the comments. The group concluded to defer the discussion of these comments until everyone had a chance to go through document 485.
AI-2 (Haihong) Haihong to update the document showing exactly which "unresolved" comments document 485 addresses.
AI-3 (all): People are requested to send their comments by e-mail (to the members of the Ad-hoc Group) on the updated document (485r7) which will be uploaded by Haihong. Comments to be discussed in the AhG mailing list.
---------------
The third set of comments dealt with Section 6.3.3.8 (36 comments of which 6 are handled in the first set)
Currently there are 6 forwarding modes (Tunnel Packet mode, Tunnel burst mode, Burst based forwarding, Station CID based forwarding, CID encapsulation and HARQ). There was a short dicussion on whether to keep all the forwarding modes. The group was divided in this regard. Some members wanted to remove some of the modes while the others wanted to keep all the modes but fix them if anything is broken. The group decided to make a list of features and the proponents/supporters of each forwarding mode will indicate which features are supported by which mode. Note this was a not a discussion on relay profiles. Just a list of features that each forwarding mode has/supports. The goal is to update the draft text to clearly indicate the supported features in each forwardinf mode.
AI-4 (Ken): Propose a list of features to get clarity on the functinality supported by each forwarding mode(Limited to feature list only)
AI-5 (All): Review the fetuares that Ken has suggested and provide comments on missing/redundant features.
Then we discussed specific comments based on "ForwardingComments-r3.doc" which was uploaded to the server by Rakesh and Hyunjeong. The group went through the document and several issues were discussed. In particular, the following comments could be resolved within the AhG.
471, 472, 473, 485 (Pending confirmation from Aik who could not be present on the call).
493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498
487 (AhG recommends to accept the comment. The group further recommended to inform the HARQ AhG that this comment has been marked as accept by AhG #1).
AI-6 (Haihong) To propose a sentence that deals with the issue of when tunnels may be created. And propose an appropriate place in the current draft to
insert that sentence.
AI-7 (Rakesh) Update the document and indicate which comments are remaining
AI-8 (All) Review the updated document
Next Meeting:
Tentative: Tuesday 06 Nov, Same/Similar time as the first call (keep in mind the daylight saving time).
Final time to be announced soon.
Input to the meeting: ForwardingAhGComments-Composite-a4.xls
Output of the meeting: ForwardingAhGComments-Composite-AhG-Call-2Nov.xls
The output spreadsheet file has been uploaded to the server (Contains AhG recommendation on 28 comments discussed above).
If there are any omissions/mistakes, please let me know.
Kind Regards
Rakesh
------- Original Message -------
Sender : Rakesh Taori<rakesh.taori@samsung.com> R&D Staff Member/Communication & Networking Lab/Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology
Date : Nov 01, 2007 02:33 (GMT+09:00)
Title : [STDS-802-16] [Relay TG] [Forwarding ad-hoc]CC announcement and
Comment Handling
Dear All,
This e-mail concerns TGj Ad-hoc Group #1 (Topics: Forwarding, QoS)
- 23 people expressed interest in this activity besides the chairs who had no choice (See list below. If you are not there, please alert us).
- 8 have provided inputs. Thank you very much. It really helped.
I have compiled a spreadsheet appending the 8 inputs (File: ForwardingAhGComments-Composite.xls has been uploaded to temp server).
- The column "Summary" captures agreements. There are 18 such comments.
What next?
(1) Download the spreadsheet from the temp database and review
http://dot16.org/CSUpload/CSUpload.cgi?command=viewupload&database=temp_db
(2) Check whether you agree with resolution that is in the "Summary Column"
(3) Consider if you would like to attend the 1st Conf call
Bridge Details (Courtesy: Nortel Networks)
Day: Friday GMT 12:00 - 14:00 (= Friday 7 am Central, 8 am Eastern, 9 pm Korea/Japan, 8 pm China)
Bridge#: +1-613-763-0170
Passcode: 3935345#
(4) We plan to deal with the following (around 60) comments:
Unanimous Accept (18 comments)
------------------
10 186 thru 196 - No conflicts.
1 470
2 477-478
1 482
1 491 Withdrawn by the commenter
1 492
1 840 (Accepted Modified: Delete 'may)
1 847
------
18 comments
Comments for consideration
---------------------------
(12) 246 thru 272 --> Consider referring to latest revision of Document C802-16j_485.doc (Haihong - please upload the document to the temp server)
(36 - 6) 463 thru 507 --> comments dealing with Section 6.3.3.8 (including all subsections).
Please feel free to point to omissions/mistakes and do share suggestions on how to handle the aforementioned comments.
Thanks and Kind Regards
Rakesh and GQ.
-----------------
People interested in Ad-hoc Group #1
-----------------
01 G.Q Wang, guoqiang@nortel.com,
02 Rakesh Taori rakesh.taori@samsung.com
03 Hyunjeong Kang hyunjeong.kang@samsung.com
04 Jeff Tao tao@merl.com
05 Ranga Reddy, Ranga.Reddy@us.army.mil
06 Yukihiro Takatani, yukihiro.takatani.ee@hitachi.com,
07 Peng Yan, Peng.yan@huawei.com,
08 Hang Zhang, hazhang@nortel.com,
09 Kanchei(Ken) Loa loa@iii.org.tw
10 Mary Chion, mchion@zteusa.com
11 Yuqin Chen, chen.yuqin@zte.com.cn
12 Hongyun Qu, qu.hongyun@zte.com.cn
13 Shashi maheshwari Shashi.maheshwari@nsn.com
14 Lin, Tzu-Ming tmlin@itri.org.tw
15 Yousuf Saifullah yousuf.saifullah@nsn.com
16 Keiichi Nakatsugawa nakatsugawa@jp.fujitsu.com
17 Hua-Chiang Yin hcyin@nmi.iii.org.tw
18 Haihong Zheng haihong.zheng@nsn.com
19 Chie Ming chieming@itri.org.tw
20 Masato Okuda okuda@jp.fujitsu.com
21 Wei-Peng Chen, wei-peng.chen@us.fujitsu.com
22 Gamini Seranath gamini@nortel.com
23 Israfil Bahceci bahcecis@nortel.com
24 David Comstock dcomstock@huawei.com
25 Jerry Sydir Jerry.sydir@intel.com
------- Original Message -------
Sender : Rakesh Taori<rakesh.taori@samsung.com> R&D Staff Member/Communication & Networking Lab/Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology
Date : Oct 29, 2007 14:22
Title : [STDS-802-16] [Relay TG] [Forwarding ad-hoc]List of Comments
(Earlier attempt to send the Excel file as an attachment failed. So, I haveuploaded the excel file to the wirelessman.org temp directory).
Dear All,
As indicated in the e-mail from the TGj chair, Guo-Qiang Wang (GQ) and I will coordinate the resolution of the comments that have been assigned to Ad-hoc Group #1 (Topics: Data Forwarding, QoS).
To help you decide whether you wish to join the discussions in Ad-hoc group #1, an excel file (ForwardingAhGComments.xls), containing a list of comments that have been assigned to this group by the chair team, has been upload to the Temp Directory of the wirelessman upload area.
http://dot16.org/CSUpload/CSUpload.cgi?command=viewupload&database=temp_db
To deal with the 100 comments assigned to this ad-hoc, I have attempted to group the comments that could (should?) be dealt together.
To have a meaningful discussion, we need Comments. Please draw a new column (initial it with your name) in the atatched spreadsheet and express your opinion (Accept/Reject/Accepted-Modified along with a short caption of reasoning). Expressing your opinion is not mandatory of course - but it helps to kick-start a discussion. It will also help us to separate the contentious issues form the not so contentious ones.
If you wish to join the discussion, please let us (me and/or GQ) know the following by Tuesday (30/10) AOE
(1) Name with e-mail address (Mandatory).
(2) Time period of the day (expressed in GMT) when you CANNOT attend a phone call conference
(3) The attached spreadsheet appended with a new column containing your opinion (Desirable).
Depending on the comments received, we will send a proposal on how to organize the discussion including call conference schedule etc.
The most crucial thing at this stage is to participate by providing your inputs so that we can separate the contentious comments from the not so contentious ones and organize the discussion such that comments/issues that need discussion are allocated the required time.
Thanks and Kind Regards
Rakesh
(on behalf of Rakesh and GQ)
P.S: If you are interested in following the discussions in this ad-hoc group, but have NO intention of attending the phone call conferences, then please answer (2) in the foregoing list as "No restriction".