[16NG] What is your opinions regarding to IEEE802.16?

Dear Authors of the RFC 4840,

IEEE 802.16 specifies several convergence sublayer (CS) including ATM, IPv4
packet, IPv6 packet, IPv4 over EThernet, IPv6 over Ethernet, IPv4 over VLAN,
IPv6 over VLAN and more.
Also, it should be used management plane to identify CS because 802.16 MAC
frame does not have a CS identification field.

Whereas, IP family uses its header to identify for the upper layer service.
For example, Ethernet type at the Ethernet header is used 0X0800 and 0X86DD
for IPv4, IPv6 respectively.
The protocol field at the IP header uses for identification of the upper
layer protocol, in reference at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers

If the IEEE802.16 systems are implemented for IPv4 packet only. It doesn't
matter.
When we try to dual stack, both native IPv4 over IEEE802.16 and native IPv6
IEEE802.16, it is more difficult than Ethernet based IP due to absence of CS
type at the 16 MAC header.

Even if connection identifier (CID) field of 16 header can be used between
base station and subscriber station, multiple CS should be processed at the
BS.
Also, prefix model IP family over IEEE802.16 such as shared prefix and
per-MS prefix impacts on network architecture and implementation.

Which is preferred prefix model?
Are you agree to require dual stack over IEEE 802.16 system (may be stupid
question, but is is possible IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel for IPv6 packet
delivery) ?
What is your preferred CS ? and Why?

thanks

------------------------------------------------
Sang-Eon Kim
Senior Researcher
Infra. Lab., KT
139-791, Woomyeon-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea

Voice: +82-2-526-6117
Mobile: +82-10-3073-4084
E-mail: Kim.SangEon@gmail.com
------------------------------------------------