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

[STDS-802-16]

Agreed.

Local Routing only makes sense at a city, regional or even national level,
as opposed to say sending your flow all the way back to a core network that
may not even be in the same country. After all, the vast majority of voice
calls are to people within the same city or region. Internet flows also can
connect through local gateways to the Internet instead of traveling long
distances on private network only then to jump on the public Internet.

But just as Max identifies, flows are very rarely directed at a destination
on the same Macro-BS, much less on the same Relay. Gaming may be the only
flow type where this may be slightly more common, but even then it is not
the norm.

The reality is that Local Routing at the air interface level doesn't meet
any specific need and really interferes with important network level
functions like lawful intercept and accounting. Introducing the complexity
to overcome that interference to serve an admittedly very low demand service
seems excessive.

Local Routing has a place in network solutions, but it is not in the air
interface.

Thanks,
Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Riegel, Maximilian (NSN - DE/Munich)
[mailto:maximilian.riegel@NSN.COM] 
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 2:12 AM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [STDS-802-16]

I completely agree with the formers. But legacy thinking slowly dies.
The idea of local routing stems from the history of telephony dominated
communications. Formerly the people called more often their neighbors
than distant relatives, probably caused by the high charges for long
distant calls. The Internet age is different, but the thinking of
ancient times did not change.

Bye
Max

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Kenneth Stanwood [mailto:kstanwood@KLSWIRELESS.COM] 
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 7:41 PM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [STDS-802-16]

I completely agree with Brian.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kiernan, Brian G <Brian.Kiernan@INTERDIGITAL.COM>
Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2009 9:55 AM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG <STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Subject: [STDS-802-16]


Local Routing has no real advantage unless the bulk of the traffic is
local.  Before you start trying to solve the technical issues, I suggest
you determine if it really is worth solving.  Most of the cellular
carriers have found out over the years that local routing is a solution
looking for a problem, as relatively little mobile traffic is local
(e.g, within the same coverage area).

-----Original Message-----
From: Nadeem Akhtar [mailto:nadeem@CEWIT.ORG.IN]
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 6:40 AM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [STDS-802-16]

Dear Peretz, all,

In addition to the issues you have mentioned, there's also the need for
lawful interception which is difficult to meet when Local Routing is
applied.

Regards,
Nadeem

>
> dear Sydir, Rakesh, and all,
> I'm just wondering why don't we consider LR (Local Routing). I'm aware
> of a few drawbacks such as accounting/billing issues, etc', but still
LR
> has a lot of advantages such as decreasing of backhauling load,
> decreasing of delay, .... .
>
>
> Thanks,
> peretz Shekalim
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Sydir, Jerry [mailto:jerry.sydir@INTEL.COM]
> Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 3:49 AM
> To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: [STDS-802-16]
>
>
>
> Dear Relay DG participants,
>
>
>
> We have uploaded the minutes from the second Relay DG conference call
to
> the temp directory. Here is a link for your convenience.
>
>
http://dot16.org/ul//upload/temp_db/RelayDG%2dMinutes%2d2ndCC%2d10SeptPS
> T.txt
>
<http://dot16.org/ul/upload/temp_db/RelayDG%2dMinutes%2d2ndCC%2d10SeptPS
> T.txt>
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Jerry Sydir and Rakesh Taori
>
> Relay DG Chairs
>
>
>
>
>
>


--