Subject: RE: [DNA] Re: [Mipshop] RE: [Mobopts] Interest in protocols for IEEE802.21IS, CS, ES

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:00:13 -0700

Hi Eunsoo,

Despite the opinion that it will be a long and open-ended process to
modify IEEE 802 MAC layers to adopt IEEE 802.21, that is the plan (well,
not that it will be necessarily long and open ended ;^). Within the IEEE
802.11 and 802.16 working groups there are already groups assigned to
this task.

Even so, there is still the need for the MIH IS (and potentially ES and
CS)  to be available between entities that cannot communicate directly
via MAC services. 

Best Regards,
Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext Eunsoo
Shim
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 11:01 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Singh Ajoy-ASINGH1; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]';
[email-masked]'; 'Marco Liebsch'; [email-masked]';
[email-masked]'; [email-masked]'; Patil
Basavaraj (Nokia-NET/Dallas); [email-masked]'
Subject: [DNA] Re: [Mipshop] RE: [Mobopts] Interest in protocols for
IEEE802.21IS, CS, ES

Hi, Soohong,

Please let me add a comment in this discussion.

> CARD is an IETF stuff. 802.21 framework runs under IP layer.
>
This is generally the case. But the requirement of 802.21 IS
(Information Service) "to be Media Indepent" makes a different case.
If the contact point for a mobile talking 802.21 IS is a function
separated from (or independent of) any specific L2 entity or L2
technology, then it should be IP transport. If L2 protocol entities such
as the Access Point talk 802.21 IS, this adds a lot of overhead to each
L2 protocol and its entity such as Access Points, in particular if they
have to learn about the environment (maybe beyond the scope of its own
technology?) such as IP layer information.

It would be a long and open-ended process to modify/extend every single
L2 to adopt 802.21 IS. To be "Media Independent", using IP as transport
is a logical and quickest way. So I'd say 802.21 framework will be
designed in IEEE 802.21 but the protocol for 802.21 IS should come from
IETF. If a protocol comes from IETF, CARD is the primary candidate
because it was designed for the functions IEEE 802.21 IS is meant to do.
What do you think?

Regards,

Eunsoo

---

From: Eunsoo Shim <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 15:14:50 -0400

Hi, Michael,

If there is a IP-based protocol, it will solve the problem at once for 
all L2 technologies.
Nowadays, all wireless network technologies are moving forward to IP.
In particular, 802.11 and 802.16 support IP from the beginning.
Furthermore, if you want to allow any location of the information 
service entity in the network side, there is no other choice but to take 
IP as transport.
If 802.21 WG develops MAC-specific protocols in parallel with an 
IP-based protocol, there will be lots duplicate and unnecessary effort.
 From the implementation point of view, a mobile node might have to 
contain multiple protocol entities for the same function (eg. IS over 
802.11 MAC, IS over 802.16 MAC and IS over IP). 

Why do you want to do that?
Regards,

Eunsoo