Re: [802.21] QoS resources (throughput) issue in Query and Commit HO phases

[David Cypher <david.cypher@nist.gov>]

Pedro Miguel Neves,

Researching the missing pieces from Draft 7.0 to the current D14.
The following comment (456) was received against draft 7 during the first
sponsor ballot process.  
This explains the removal of throughput from the QOS_LIST ( in order to
satisfy a disapproved NO vote comment).
Thus throughput did not exist in Draft 8.0 forward to D14.0.

David Cypher
======================================== 
At 06:09 AM 11/10/2008, Pedro Miguel Neves wrote:
> Dear All,
>  
> I am currently working on seamless mobility mechanisms & IEEE 802.21
> and I have a question related with the IEEE 802.21 query and commit
> phases of the handover.
>  
> In order to query the candidate access technology, the
> MIH_MN_HO_Candidate_Query message should carry the required QoS
> resources. Likewise, the MIH_MN_HO_Commit message should also
> carry the QoS resources to establish the reservations in the selected
> candidate access technology. Nevertheless, in version 14 of the draft,
> the QoSResourceRequirements parameter (QOS_LIST Data Type),
> present in both messages, does not indicate the throughput
> value parameter. Instead, is carries only jitter, delay and packet loss
> info, as follows: (as depicted in Table F.9 - page 241 of the draft
> v14):
> SEQUENCE(NUM_COS_TYPES, LIST(MIN_PK_TX_DELAY),
> LIST(AVG_PK_TX_DELAY), LIST(MAX_PK_TX_DELAY), LIST(PK_DELAY_JITTER),
> LIST(PK_LOSS_RATE) ) à Throughput is missing
>  
> Therefore, how is the throughput value parameter sent to the candidate
> access technologies? Is there any other parameter carrying this
> info?
>  
> Moreover, in previous versions of the draft, this information was
> included in the QOS_LIST data type (e.g. v07):
> SEQUENCE(NUM_QOS_TYPES, THROUGHPUT, PACKET_ERROR_RATE,
> LIST(COS_MIN_PACKET_TRANSFER_DELAY), LIST(COS_AVG_PACKET_TRANSFER_DELAY),
> LIST(COS_MAX_PACKETTRANSFER_DELAY), LIST(COS_PACKET_DELAY_JITTER),
> LIST(COS_PACKET_LOSS_RATE))
>  
> Can you please clarify this issue?
>  
> Thanks in advance for your help and kindness.
>  
> Best Regards,
> Pedro Neves

Attachment: 21-07-0340-07_SB_Comments.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document