[16NG] IEEE 802.16 review on PS and Goal document
"Daniel Park" <soohongp@gmail.com> Fri, 14 December 2007 02:45 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 1J30YF-0004oC-Ex; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:45:23 -0500
Received: from 16ng by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43)
id 1J30YD-0004o6-IY
for 16ng-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:45:21 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J30YD-0004nx-8M
for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:45:21 -0500
Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.240])
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J30YC-0000nJ-Hf
for 16ng@ietf.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 21:45:21 -0500
Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d11so276328and.122
for <16ng@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:45:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type;
bh=xxMb2PdLUIy+xoN0F5/nqPsSMFbcJVnYZXsevlbLLdU=;
b=ewH6O4ihwHPDydFDNzmKhYFpqNVB753fk/C+NoJLRRxCF5eESM5MOcyUSu0e7CAc1OzauBArauRq9gZKum3WdJhnnpW1/l5jo/Ow72hAZYtABrAil/U+Yahh5Wmpdvtt3Lelkqk8JEFbECy79cXJTgU+9r5bToBOqgi4A4SUp7A=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:mime-version:content-type;
b=wx+C2NTpUuvoFO0fuG8C1K5OKLmXjBIma2HhRtOXNAQndTH/P3t9taBrh+DzQmM2TczvlLm01VqJaA8CAOvReh21k6J7B1DL0E/AFasZH5Bj7ypEhsaE2zYw3G6HUrneN5uP/wh39G5ZtdAMKXSyODu/7gikwtOYN5teTCgY69c=
Received: by 10.100.135.16 with SMTP id i16mr5708296and.51.1197600320226;
Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:45:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.100.215.8 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:45:20 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <f7c7d76e0712131845w404fd577v60d54f5f31b797e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:45:20 +0900
From: "Daniel Park" <soohongp@gmail.com>
To: "16ng@ietf.org" <16ng@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 5ebbf074524e58e662bc8209a6235027
Cc:
Subject: [16NG] IEEE 802.16 review on PS and Goal document
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1500086137=="
Errors-To: 16ng-bounces@ietf.org
Junghoon, This is another IEEE 802.16 expert review. Thanks much Erik Colban... Daniel Park ------------------------------ *From:* Erik Colban *Sent:* Monday, October 15, 2007 11:30 AM *To:* 'Johnston, DJ' *Subject:* 16ng review Hi DJ, I haven't noticed any emails related to the 16ng ad-hoc. I have compiled the following comments: 1) The document is focused on the problem of configuring an IP subnet over the 802.16 link. However, despite mentioning work done in NWG, the draft does not address the case where IP packets are tunneled to and from a Home Agent in the home or visited CSN. Problems that the draft focuses on are not relevant in this case. The document should be clearer on which deployment scenarios it is or is not addressing, or put into context the scenario where the SS's IP address is assigned by a home network. 2) The document mentions problems with PPP because there is no Convergence Sublayer for PPP. However, GPCS was introduced in 802.16g to avoid having to keep changing the 802.16 standard to introduce CS layers for yet other protocols. In the early days of 16ng I was trying to push the group to take GPCS into consideration and was then met with the argument that 16g was not yet published. However, now that 16g has been approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board for publication (which happened on 9/27), 16ng should reconsider the use of GPCS. When 16g actually becomes published, the reference section should be updated to include a reference to the 802.16gamendment. GPCS is not only useful for the PPP link model, but also when classification at the BS is done based on the data path identifier (e.g., GRE key) used to tunnel packets between the BS and the ASN-GW. 3) Section 4. "Overview of the IEEE 802.16-2004 MAC layer" states "Each node in the network possesses a 48-bit MAC address (though in the Base Station this 48-bit unique identifier is called "BSId")." This statement is not correct. The BSId is not the BS MAC Address. The BS may have a MAC Address different from the BSId to communicate with other nodes on the backhaul. Unless the Ethernet CS is used, the BS MAC Address is not known to the SS. Furthermore the section title should be changed to "Overview of the IEEE 802.16 MAC layer", and the section should include reference to 16e, and if possible, more generically to the latest published version of the 802.16 standard including all published amendments. Do you plan to set up another conference call, or should I just go ahead and send my comments? Erik
_______________________________________________ 16NG mailing list 16NG@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng
- [16NG] IEEE 802.16 review on PS and Goal document Daniel Park
- [16NG] Re: IEEE 802.16 review on PS and Goal docu… Junghoon Jee