110 likes | 296 Views
IP over Ethernet over 802.16 [draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt]. IETF-69, Chicago, Jul ‘07 Max Riegel maximilian.riegel@nsn.com. Outline. Achievements since IETF-68 16ng mailing list New revision: draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt Adoption of RFC4605
E N D
IP over Ethernet over 802.16[draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt] IETF-69, Chicago, Jul ‘07 Max Riegel maximilian.riegel@nsn.com
Outline • Achievements since IETF-68 • 16ng mailing list • New revision: draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt • Adoption of RFC4605 • Deployment of link layer multicast (MBS) • Conclusion and next steps
Achievements • Feedback after IETF-68 showed good understanding and agreement on network model for IPoETH in IEEE802.16 • No severe issues detected in I-D • Separation of QoS differentiation and forwarding decision • Forwarding decision in bridge behind BS • see next slide
CS SAP CS SAP CS SAP Classifier Classifier Classifier CID#1 CID#3 CID#5 PHS (opt.) PHS (opt.) PHS (opt.) MAC SAP MAC SAP MAC SAP MAC Common Part Sublayer (MAC CPS) MAC Common Part Sublayer (MAC CPS) MAC Common Part Sublayer (MAC CPS) Privacy Sublayer Privacy Sublayer Privacy Sublayer PHY SAP PHY SAP PHY SAP Physical Layer (PHY) Physical Layer (PHY) Physical Layer (PHY) IEEE802.16 IPoETHNetwork Model IP-Service Forwarding decision Mapping & Filtering CS SAP APPL APPL APPL QoSDifferentiation CID#2 CID#4 CID#6 Classifier PHS (opt.) Data Path Function GRE-Key#1 GRE-Key#2 GRE-Key#5 GRE-Key#3 GRE-Key#4 GRE-Key#6 GRE Data Path Function MAC SAP MAC Common Part Sublayer (MAC CPS) Privacy Sublayer PHY SAP Physical Layer (PHY) MS MS MS WiMAX BS
16ng mailing list • Only a few postings related to IPoETH-CS • Ambiguities in description of multicast behavior of IEEE802.16
New Revision: draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt • Introduction of normative language • Main goal for -02 revision • Editorial clarifications • Adoption of RFC4605 for IGMP/MLD proxying • Appendix on ‘Multicast CID Deployment Considerations’ • to show why multicast CIDs are not deployed for IPoETH-CS
Adoption of RFC4605 • Issue: • RFC4541 on IGMP/MLD snooping switches is Informational RFC • not suited for normative references • RFC4605 on IGMP/MLD proxying is aimed for routers in simple tree topologies • Ethernet Network Model for IEEE802.16 fits well into simple tree topology • RFC4605 mechanisms has been adopted to bridge behind base stations • still keeping RFC4541 as informational reference
Appendix:Issues of Multicast CIDs/MBS • Incompatibility with advanced radio layer algorithms based on feedback information from the receiver • HARQ • MIMO • Incompatibility with advanced antenna systems
cont...Issues of Multicast CIDs/MBS • Increased interference level • Higher power needed due to missing HARQ • Less efficient with mobile terminals • CID must be configured to provide sufficient signal to noise ratio to the most distant terminal. • With moving terminals the radio transmission characteristics may change and may require frequent re-adjustments of the radio link parameters.
cont...Issues of Multicast CIDs/MBS • Loss of Idle Mode for inactive terminals • Terminals have to process multicast CIDs even when ‘meaningless’ information is transferred • Increased complexity for the whole system • Multicast CIDs require management of group keys
Conclusion and next steps • Revision -02 provides essential enhancements (normative language) • Concept of IPoETH-CS has been shown to be quite mature • draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-02.txt is ready for WGLC