Re: [802.21] [Mipshop] Re: Architectural Considerations for Handover InformationServices (was: Re: CARD Discussion Query Discussion)
I think it is not just about how dynamically the information database needs
to be updated, it is also about how dynamically the mobile terminal needs to
consult the information and how often its environment changes due to its
movement. I fail to envisage a system that is so deterministic that I can
take comfort to ignore timing issues.
Let's say I have a completely wrong assumption of what IS is for. Based on
all these exchanges, I can only conclude that the IS provides a means to
query information from a rather static database; the use may be helpful but
is not required for the purpose of handover; it is not clear where and how
the database obtains the information; it is not clear whether the
information can already be obtained by existing means.
> From: Yoshihiro Ohba <yohba@tari.toshiba.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 10:24:29 -0400
> To: Hong-Yon Lach <hong-yon.lach@MOTOROLA.COM>
> Cc: <STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org>
> Subject: Re: [802.21] [Mipshop] Re: Architectural Considerations for Handover
> InformationServices (was: Re: CARD Discussion Query Discussion)
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 02:40:41PM +0200, Hong-Yon Lach wrote:
>> I have heard examples in which I would consider the information as dynamic,
>> such as the "neighbouring network/access points available that match ..."
>> and examples in which the information is very static (does not change much
>> with time).
>
> The example does not require information database to be dynamically
> updated in a relatively short time period.
>
>>
>> The dynamic nature of information, depending on the specific piece of
>> information, could be different according to deployment, and could change
>> over time.
>
> The dynamically chaning information is provided by ES and CS, not by
> IS. I think we have been clear on this requirement.
>
> Yoshihiro Ohba
>
>
>>
>> When IS is used in the preparation of handover, it would be nice to minimise
>> such preparation time, because the longer it is the more likely the risk of
>> losing current network coverage and making handover less seamless. Maybe IS
>> is not meant to be used in such context? Anyway, it will be a good step
>> forward to know what we are assuming/doing/enabling and what we are not.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Yoshihiro has given example about
>>
>>
>>> From: Peretz Feder <pfeder@lucent.com>
>>> Organization: Lucent Technologies
>>> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 08:10:54 -0400
>>> To: Hong-Yon Lach <hong-yon.lach@motorola.com>
>>> Cc: <STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [802.21] [Mipshop] Re: Architectural Considerations for
>>> Handover
>>> InformationServices (was: Re: CARD Discussion Query Discussion)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/20/2005 5:00 AM, Hong-Yon Lach wrote:
>>>> Apparently, we still have very different ideas in mind when we talk about
>>>> IS
>>>> concerning what it is. A lot of discussions so far concerns how it should
>>>> be
>>>> supported. Peretz, I think you pointed out the consequence that we can only
>>>> disagree about the assumption of IS.
>>>
>>> We are not agreeing on its dynamic nature. The rest we do.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> How IS is to be used and should be supported depends on what information IS
>>>> is dealing with. If we do not have consensus on the nature/type/purpose of
>>>> information to be coped with in IS, I don't see how 802.21 can produce a
>>>> requirement on IS and how MIPSHOP knows what it is doing for IS.
>>>
>>> IS is dealing with all the relevant info that can assist the HO decision. To
>>> assume that in a middle of a few msec hanodoff the IS DB can be queried for
>>> pertinent HO info. and exchange all of that over L3 is a very loaded
>>> assumption,
>>> as it assumes that the IS DB will be updated at such resolutions and its
>>> info
>>> be
>>> relevant to a a few msec process.
>>>
>>>
>>> Your bleak statement is not so black and white. IS info is relevant and can
>>> be
>>> very well defined but it is not dynamic in nature.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Hong-Yon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From: Peretz Feder <pfeder@LUCENT.COM>
>>>>> Organization: Lucent Technologies
>>>>> Reply-To: Peretz Feder <pfeder@LUCENT.COM>
>>>>> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 01:03:18 -0400
>>>>> To: <STDS-802-21@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [802.21] [Mipshop] Re: Architectural Considerations for
>>>>> Handover
>>>>> InformationServices (was: Re: CARD Discussion Query Discussion)
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/18/2005 6:11 PM, Qiaobing Xie wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - In reality, 3GPP2 has XML-based method (e.g., XCAP) in its
>>>>>>> dependency list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I remember it right XCAP/XML is used there for maintaining the
>>>>>> address book/buddy list that sort of things. I can imagine that sort of
>>>>>> events only happen at most no more than a few times a day for any given
>>>>>> user and probably only happen when the user is NOT in a call. In
>>>>>> contrast, IS query/response likely will be part of the h/o call flow...
>>>>>
>>>>> You are assuming IS is a dynamic information that can influence Handover
>>>>> per
>>>>> the
>>>>> IS query response. Many .21 members do not agree with this position. IS
>>>>> should
>>>>> be treated as static information that is provided to the HO decision
>>>>> entity
>>>>> in
>>>>> advance.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> -Qiaobing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yoshihiro Ohba
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>