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

Re: [802.21] 802.21 Information Elements



Vivek and all,

I think this is a good document that well captures many discussion
points made during the September meeting.  I have several comments.

General comments
----------------

- It would be good if we have a new column that indicates whether an IE
belongs to basic set or extended set.

- Are the 802.11 Applicability and 802.16 Applicability informational
for better understanding or should the two columns be included in the
draft text as well?

Specific comments
-----------------

- Number of point of Attachments (PoA) for a specific Access Network
in the Neighborhood

Since the table contains Address Information for each PoA, the number
of PoAs is implicitly known.  Do we need to define this IE?

- Network Operator

As someone pointed out in today's teleconf. on 802.16 amendment, the
802.16e network operator provided by BSID is valid within 802.16
networks.  As far as I remember, a rough agreement during the
September meeting is that 802.21 Network Operator should use a global
unique identifier across all network types (but there was no agreement
which specific identifier is appropriate.)  I personally think that
operator's domain name might be the only acceptable global unique
identifier used for representing network operator across all network
types.  Note that if an UE needs to obtain an 802.16e network operator
information of a specific 802.16 BS from non-802.16 network, it can be
obtained in the same way as PHY type and MAC type (media-specific
information is already defined in media-specific MIBs and can be
obtained via extended set access), so the 802.21 Network Operator does
not necessarily carry 802.16e network operator information.

- Subnet Information 

As far as I remember the discussion during September meeting, it is
hard to define for us to determine which specific higher-layer
information is useful for 802.21.  I think Subnet information (and
higher layer service as suggested by Kalyan) can be better replaced
with a general item such as "higher-layer information", and make it 
an extended set IE.

Best regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba






 
        
 
On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 04:49:45AM -0700, Gupta, Vivek G wrote:
>  
> 
> When it comes to 802.21 Information Service, we have had quite a bit of
> discussion on different encoding schemes, access/query mechanisms, L2 vs
> L3, etc. However one aspect where we have had relatively less of a
> discussion is the Information Elements themselves. 
> 
>  
> 
> Please find the attached document which lists the different IEs
> currently under consideration in 802.21. The doc makes no attempt to
> organize/encode these IEs in any particular way (schema etc.). The
> intent is to just focus on INFORMATION itself ...
> 
>  
> 
> Please send in your comments and any other suggested IEs that may help
> from handover perspective. 
> 
> We shall compile all received feedback and submit this as
> updated/consolidated list of IEs for next meeting.
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> -Vivek
>