May 10 14 2004 doc IEEE 802 21

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Defining Layer 2. 5 Alan Carlton Interdigital Communications alan. carlton@interdigital. com Submission 1 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Objectives Ø To stimulate a discussion on the preferred 802. 21 Mobility Architecture Ø To stimulate a discussion on the scope of 802. 21 Ø To review Typical Mobile System architecture approaches as they may pertain to the broad objectives of 802. 21 Submission 2 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Mobile System Terminology Used in this Presentation Ø Two key modes exist for typical mobile systems - IDLE mode and CONNECTED mode: § IDLE mode (STA) characteristics § No User service, monitoring of paging channels, available service request channels § 100% of Receiver available for Downlink Measurements § Background coordination, unscheduled AP/technology reselection § CONNECTED mode (STA) characteristics § Active User service (e. g. a call), Handover possible § Limited Receiver availability for measurements (User service takes priority) § Fully Coordinated, scheduled AP/technology handover Ø Selection: § Prior to entering IDLE mode (e. g. at Power up) the STA must perform selection in order to determine the best AP and technology available for service Ø Reselection: § While in IDLE mode (i. e. No User service) the STA must continuously examine neighbor AP (and different technology AP). Upon determination of a ‘better’ AP the STA will transition over to the new AP Ø Handover § While in CONNECTED mode (i. e. Active User Service) a handover occurs upon transition from one AP to another AP (possibly using a different technology) offering significantly Submission 3 Communications better service. In the ideal case this transition will Alan occur. Carlton, without. Interdigital noticeable interruption of

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx The Cellular Mobility Model Full Mobility Support e. g. Switch, Server Network Handover Policy Function e. g. 2 G BSC, 3 G RNC Radio Network Semi-Static Frequency Assignments GSM/900 GSM 900 AP GSM 1800 AP AP GSM 900 AP AP e. g. GSM Base Station AP AP EDGE FDD e. g. FDD Node B e. g. 2 G MS, 3 G UE Cellular STA Centralized Radio Resource Management Approach Submission 4 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx The Cellular Mobility Model (Continued) Ø Radio Network Characterization: § Centralized RRM approach (Semi-Static Frequency assignments in each AP) § Some Radio Planning Required Ø IDLE Mode Operation: § Intra-technology (e. g. GSM to GSM) § AP Selection/Reselection decision made in STA supported by System information broadcast by the Handover Policy function (Policy defined in the Handover Policy function) § Inter-technology (e. g. GSM to FDD/WCDMA) § AP Selection/Reselection decision made in STA supported by System information broadcast at the Handover Policy function (Policy defined in the Handover Policy function) Ø CONNECTED Mode Operation: § Intra-technology § AP handover decision made in the Handover Controller function supported by measurements made by the STA and sent to the Handover Policy function via L 3 signaling (Policy defined in the Handover Policy function) § Inter-technology § AP handover decision made in the Handover Policy function supported by measurements made by the STA and sent to the Handover Policy function via L 3 signaling (Policy Submission defined in the Handover Policy function) 5 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx The WLAN Mobility Model - Current Limited Mobility Support e. g. Gateway, Router Network Radio Network Dynamic Frequency Assignments 802. 11 b 802. 11 a AP AP 802. 11 AP AP AP 802. 16 AP 802. 11 n IEEE 802. X STA Distributed Radio Resource Management Approach Submission 6 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx The WLAN Mobility Model (Continued) Ø Radio Network Characterization: § Distributed RRM approach (Dynamic Frequency assignments in each AP) § Radio Planning Not Required Ø IDLE Mode Operation: § Intra-technology (e. g. 802. 11 a to 802. 11 a) § AP Selection/Reselection decision made autonomously in STA (Policy defined in the STA) § Inter-technology (e. g. 802. 11 to 802. 16) § SELECTION/RESELECTION NOT STANDARDIZED – SCOPE OF 802. 21 Ø CONNECTED Mode Operation: § Intra-technology § HANDOVER NOT STANDARDIZED – SCOPE OF 802. 21 § Inter-technology § HANDOVER NOT STANDARDIZED – SCOPE OF 802. 21 General Scope of 802. 21 Submission 7 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx STA ONLY DISTRIBUTED Handover Policy Function e. g. Gateway, Router Network CENTRALIZED Handover Policy Function Option A SYSTEM Enhanced Mobility Support (802. 21) The WLAN Mobility Model – Enhanced (802. 21) Option B Radio Network Dynamic Frequency Assignments 802. 11 b 802. 11 a AP AP 802. 11 AP AP 802. 16 802. 11 n IEEE 802. X STA Two Basic Options Are Considered Submission 8 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Option A & Option B Definition Ø IDLE Mode Operation: § Intra-technology (e. g. 802. 11 a to 802. 11 a) § AP Selection/Reselection decision made autonomously in STA (Policy defined in the STA) § Inter-technology (e. g. 802. 11 to 802. 16) [SCOPE OF 802. 21] § Option A: AP Selection/Reselection decision made autonomously in STA (Policy defined in the STA) § Option B: AP Selection/Reselection decision made in STA supported by System information broadcast at the Handover Policy function level (Policy defined in the Handover Policy Function) Ø CONNECTED Mode Operation: § Intra-technology [SCOPE OF 802. 21] § Option A: AP handover decision made autonomously in STA (Policy defined in the STA) § Option B: AP handover decision made in the Handover Policy function supported by measurements made by the STA and sent to the Handover Policy function via new signaling mechanisms (Policy defined in the Handover Policy Function) § Inter-technology [SCOPE OF 802. 21] § Option A: AP handover decision made autonomously in the STA (Policy defined in the Submission STA) 9 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Option A: DISTRIBUTED Handover Policy Function MAC Sublayer PLCP Sublayer PMD Sublayer MAC Sublayer ME Physical Sublayer ME Local MIB § Adequate but sub-optimal solution Ø Intra/Inter Technology Handover decision made autonomously by the STA Handover Policy Function 802. 11 Model Ø Intra/Inter Technology Reselection decision made autonomously by the STA § Slow Handover Solution /Really just an extension of Reselection and would be characterized as such in a typical Mobile system § Break and then Make strategy (Resource availability not guaranteed) § Adequate solution for non real-time services § Unacceptable solution for real time services (such as voice) § Poorly scaleable solution STA Functional Architecture Concept Option A Provides a Very Limited Mobility Solution Submission 10 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Option B: CENTRALIZED Handover Policy Function Handover Ø Intra/Inter Technology Reselection decision supported by System Information System Info Measurements MAC Sublayer PLCP Sublayer PMD Sublayer MAC Sublayer ME Physical Sublayer ME Layer 2. 5 Signaling/Control Function 802. 11 Model § Optimal solution System HPF Ø Intra/Inter Technology Handover decision coordinated by RPF and supported by measurement reports and System signaling § Fast Handover Solution § Make and then Break strategy (Resource availability is guaranteed) § Adequate solution for non real-time services § Acceptable solution for real time services (such as voice) § Easily scaleable solution STA Functional Architecture Concept Option B Provides a Full Mobility Solution – Typical Mobile System Architecture Approach Submission 11 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Typical Mobile System Architecture compared to 802. X Network GPRS (2 G) STA Mobility Protocol (MM) IP Convergence GSM RR 3 GPP (3 G) STA Mobility Protocol (MM) IP Convergence e. g. Mobile IP Layer 2. 5 3 G RRC GSM 04. 18 IEEE 802. xx STA 3 GPP 25. 331 IP Convergence IEEE 802. 21 Physical Data Link IEEE 802. 2 RLC LLC RLC Transparent Mode Option MAC Physical Transparent Mode Option MAC User Plane Control Plane Transparent Mode Option MAC Physical User Plane Control Plane Physical IEEE 802. 3, 11, 16… In a Full Mobility Solution Layer 2. 5 is a key enabler Submission 12 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Key Protocol Functions Resource Control Mobility Protocol (e. g. GSM-MM/MAP, Mobile (e. g. GSM-RR, 3 GPP RRC, § § IP…) L 2. 5? ) § System Information § Termination (or Paging) § Cell Selection/Reselection § Establishment § Release § Measurement Reporting Powerto Control Both Functions are required in§ order support a Full § Handover at Radio Mobility Solution Level Submission 13 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications Discovery Registration Tunneling Termination (or Paging) § Handover at Network Level § Security

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Example: End to End Functional Configuration CENTRALIZED Handover Policy Function 802. 11 Network 802. 11 a AP IEEE 802. X STA 802. 11 a AP e. g. Gateway, Router AP Network/Radio Network Functions Higher Layers Mobility Protocol Layer 2. 5 LLC Link Layer MAC Physical U-Plane Station Function Handover Policy Function Lower Layers The RHF may be defined as logical functional entity Submission 14 Alan Carlton, Interdigital Communications

May 10 -14, 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 21 -xxx Conclusions Ø The Option B architecture with a centralized Handover Policy Function would seem to be the most promising approach and is recommended. Ø In order to provide a full mobility solution both Radio Mobility (e. g. GSM RR) and Network Mobility (e. g. Mobile IP) protocol functionality is required in the system. Ø Layer 2. 5 is a key enabler in a full mobility solution. Ø In order to support the Option B Architecture 802. 21 should define a Layer 2. 5 Signaling and Control Protocol with some similar properties to RR style protocols currently used in typical Mobile systems. Ø The Handover Policy Function may be defined as a logical entity. It is not necessary to define any restrictions in the Standard on its location in a physical implementation though some recommendations may be made if valuable. Ø The Option B architecture closely maps to well proved typical Mobility System architectures and will simplify future advanced interworking scenarios unanticipated at this time (e. g. tightly coupled handover). Ø The Centralized Handover Policy Functional architecture may be easily extended to support Wireless to Wired interworking scenarios e. g. the Submission Alandevice Carlton, Interdigital Communications Handover policy upon connecting 15 a Wireless to a Wireline