RE: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review
"Johnston, DJ" <dj.johnston@intel.com> Fri, 21 September 2007 14:31 UTC
Return-path: <16ng-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1IYjXV-0001JD-St; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:31:29 -0400
Received: from 16ng by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1IYjXU-0001Cy-Op
for 16ng-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:31:28 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYjXU-0001BW-A8
for 16ng@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:31:28 -0400
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYjXO-0002RX-Vq
for 16ng@ietf.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:31:28 -0400
Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23])
by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Sep 2007 07:31:17 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.20,284,1186383600"; d="scan'208";a="316746014"
Received: from orsmsx334.jf.intel.com ([10.22.226.45])
by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Sep 2007 07:31:17 -0700
Received: from orsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.226.44]) by
orsmsx334.jf.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830);
Fri, 21 Sep 2007 07:31:16 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 07:31:11 -0700
Message-ID: <C0C6C2CB07E73E4DB1016172E55170DF016F0CFF@orsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <f7c7d76e0709201902q61a1bf17i93cb9c9851aaf360@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review
Thread-Index: Acf782j+BGNWtaBFQQOSF9TD2VoyOAAZVK3Q
References: <LISTSERV%200709120719151634.0642@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
<C0C6C2CB07E73E4DB1016172E55170DF0164489C@orsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com>
<000f01c7f667$a17767d0$6b70fe81@etriabcb8a0047>
<C0C6C2CB07E73E4DB1016172E55170DF016F073E@orsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com>
<d47344770709201842u2a34fb61wdb6e4c20a85a260c@mail.gmail.com>
<f7c7d76e0709201902q61a1bf17i93cb9c9851aaf360@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Johnston, DJ" <dj.johnston@intel.com>
To: "Daniel Park" <soohongp@gmail.com>,
<16ng@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2007 14:31:16.0992 (UTC)
FILETIME=[11D83000:01C7FC5C]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 057ebe9b96adec30a7efb2aeda4c26a4
Cc:
X-BeenThere: 16ng@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: 16ng working group discussion list <16ng.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>,
<mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/16ng>
List-Post: <mailto:16ng@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng>,
<mailto:16ng-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: 16ng-bounces@ietf.org
Daniel, In the 802.16 netman task group and in the 802.16 closing plenary in Malaga this week it was decided to form an official ad hoc group to have an internal forum to review the PS and Ethernet documents. 802.16 Members and attendees were updated on the 16ng status, provided with links to the current documents and encouraged to go and review and comment on them. There will (assuming EC approval) be an official liaison letter to that effect heading your way, since 802.16 approved one. I've provided my personal input on the Ethernet draft which I still stand by: Annex A is inappropriate and there are much simpler architectural reasons for not using MBS to model a bridged Ethernet. I.E. Having an asymmetric multicast downlink and unicast uplink breaks the model on which bridging relies. Regards, DJ ---- David Johnston. dj.johnston@intel.com Cell: 503 380 5578, Desk: 503 712 4457 -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Park [mailto:soohongp@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 7:02 PM To: Junghoon Jee; Johnston, DJ Cc: Roger B. Marks Subject: Re: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review Thanks DJ and Junghoon for your good job. DJ, are you taling with Roger if you are at the same location for 802.16 meeting ? Roger said me to search for some experts to go through this document once again. That's is also what Jari as our director is thinking about the advancement of this document in IETF. Roger, if you are also fully happy with DJ's opinion, please let me and Jari know your judgement to advance this document quickly Thanks in advance, Daniel Park On 9/21/07, Junghoon Jee <junghoon.jee@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank DJ very much! > > Junghoon > > > 2007/9/21, Johnston, DJ <dj.johnston@intel.com>om>: > > > > Junghoon, > > > > The document reviewing PS-01 is attached. > > > > I have reviewed PS-02 and have no further comments. I'm happy with the > > contents. > > > > In the event that the attachment is not attached, the document can be > > found at http://www.deadhat.com/16ng_PS_Review.doc > > > > DJ > > > > > > > > ---- > > David Johnston. dj.johnston@intel.com Cell: 503 380 5578, Desk: 503 712 > > 4457 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Junghoon Jee [mailto: jhjee@etri.re.kr] > > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 5:39 PM > > To: Johnston, DJ > > Subject: 16ng PS review > > > > Dear DJ, > > Recently, IETF 16ng Problem Statement document is under AD review. > > For 16ng folks information, could you send your review of 16ng PS-01 to > > the 16ng mailing list? > > > > Best Regards, > > Junghoon > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 16NG mailing list > > 16NG@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 16NG mailing list > 16NG@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng > > _______________________________________________ 16NG mailing list 16NG@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
- [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review Johnston, DJ
- Re: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review Junghoon Jee
- RE: [16NG] RE: 16ng PS review Johnston, DJ