RE: Monday August 9th 7AM Pacific ad hoc on requirements
Greetings,
Once again the following comment: (I hope we can take this after Ajay's
comments as agreed in previous meeting)
Comment 1 on chapter 5.2 on rev 7 requirement document:
The following text:
"The 802.21 standard shall facilitate handover scenarios related to
WLAN-cellular inter-working as specified by Scenarios 4 and 5 in 3GPP
standard."
Should be either removed, or rewritten in the following way:
"The 802.21 standard shall facilitate service continuity and seamless
operation in the handover process between the IEEE 802 and Non-IEEE Cellular
systems."
This text would consider also other than WLAN systems (802.11?) from 802 and
have the requirement in cleartext what the scenarios from 3GPP are aiming
at. Then it is up to the proposals to come out with a solution how this
could be achieved. As mentioned before there is very little information
available about the details of the scenarios 4 and 5 from 3GPP side, so it
is not possible to evaluate the proposals on this requirement as it is
written now in the requirement spec.
Comment 2 on chapter 4.3
Replace "Information Base" with "Information Service".
Reason: The requirement specification should list the problems that need to
be solved in the proposals, the information base is more reflecting a
solution to the problem(s). By replacing the text with "information
service", it gives more flexibility to use also other mechanisms (like
parameters, analysis mechanisms and other means) in the proposals to solve
the problems than just using a database mechanism. Then in the evaluation it
is possible to select the best one of the proposals in this particular
issue.
Also a pure database solution could have other unwanted characteristics, to
list some of them here it could be quite big in real life systems, and
contains very critical information which could make it a single point of
failure in the system if it gets corrupted for some reason. Also it can be
quite sensitive for the operators to put their network information in such a
database since the competitors could also easily check quite a lot of things
from the information base - it is accessible from any network. Also
maintaining large databases generates operator costs. Here the database
should somehow be connected to the network management system, possibly also
to billing systems, authentication systems and so on - for all supported
networks.
I hope we still can discuss about the text in this chapter, it is definitely
an architecturally significant requirement also.
Best Regards, Reijo Salminen
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-802-21@listserv.ieee.org] On Behalf Of
Michael.G.Williams@nokia.com
Sent: 8. elokuuta 2004 8:38
To: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Monday August 9th 7AM Pacific ad hoc on requirements
> Greetings everyone,
>
Monday August 9th *********** New Day ***************
> Call at 7AM-9AM Pacific ******** Original TIME ***********
> IEEE 802.21 conf call info:
> DIAL-IN NUMBERS & PASSCODES:
> Toll Numbers: USA 1-210-280-7160
> Participant Passcode: 313495
>
> Agenda:
> - Roll Call
> - Requirements Review (Please review the latest doc, rev 7 sent to list
via ZIP 08/05/2004)
- Continue Ajay Rajkumar's input (emailed as .doc referring to rev 6
on 8/2/2004)
> - Eric Njedjou (emailed to list inline 7/26/2004)
> - Mahalingam Mani input (emailed to list .doc referring to rev 5 on
7/25/2004)
> - Confirm all out-of-band work performed directly with editor on
your text is architecturally/technically satisfied
> - Next Steps (Call for Proposals)
>
> We will continue to focus on architecturally significant requirements. All
are encouraged to focus on adding value to the standard as first priority.
If you have comments regarding style or "standards-speak" please forward
them directly to the editor.
>
>
> Looking forward to speaking with you soon,
> Michael Williams
> IEEE 802.21 Vice Chair
>
>