IP over Ethernet over 802.16 [draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.txt] - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

IP over Ethernet over 802.16 [draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.txt]

Description:

Unfortunately we missed the submission deadline of our latest revision draft ... During its Session #53 in Levi, Finland of 21 -24 January, the IEEE 802.16 ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:62
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 8
Provided by: maxri
Learn more at: https://www.ietf.org
Category:
Tags: 16ng | draft | ethernet | ietf | levi | over | txt

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: IP over Ethernet over 802.16 [draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.txt]


1
IP over Ethernet over 802.16draft-ietf-16ng-ip-
over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.txt
  • IETF-71, Philadelphia, March 08
  • Max Riegel (NSN), Hongseok Jeon (ETRI), Sangjin
    Jung (ETRI)

2
We apologize
  • Unfortunately we missed the submission deadline
    of our latest revision draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-et
    hernet-over-802.16-05.txt for the IETF-71 by a
    couple of hours.
  • Nevertheless this presentation refers to the
    latest revision, which should be in the IETF
    archives after the meeting.
  • For the time beinghttp//ipv6.or.kr/draft-ietf-1
    6ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.txt

3
draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-04.t
xt
  • -04 version was submitted directly after IETF-70
  • Main issue clarification of MTU issue when using
    VLANs for tunneling between BS and Net-Bridge
  • Due to stacked VLAN tags, packet size may exceed
    capabilities of Ethernet link between BS and
    Net-Bridge
  • Most of the Carrier Ethernet equipment can handle
    larger packets
  • Operator has to be aware of this particularity
  • GRE-base tunneling does not have this issue

4
Review by IEEE802.16
  • From ext Roger B. Marks mailtor.b.marks_at_ieee.or
    g
  • Sent Sunday, January 27, 2008 116 PM
  • Subject 16NG IEEE 802.16 WG consideration of
    ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16internet draft
  • Dear Daniel and Gabriel,
  • Please consider the following statement of the
    IEEE 802.16 Working Group
  • lthttp//ieee802.org/16/liaison/docs/L80216-08_002r
    1.pdfgt
  • As always, we appreciate the opportunity to
    review your drafts.
  • Regards,
  • Roger B. Marks
  • Chair, IEEE 802.16 Working Group on Broadband
    Wireless Access

5
IEEE802.16 review comments
  • During its Session 53 in Levi, Finland of 21 -24
    January, the IEEE 802.16 Working Group (WG),
    through an ah hoc review committee, developed the
    following comments on the IETF 16ng document
    draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-04.
  • Convergence Sublayer Types
  • Section 4.2 discusses the different convergence
    sublayer types. During the development of the IP
    over Ethernet over 802.16 specification, the GPCS
    (Generic Packet Convergence Sublayer) has been
    standardized in IEEE 802.16 with the approval of
    the IEEE Std 802.16g-2007 amendment on 27
    September 2007. This convergence sublayer
    supports Ethernet packet types. It appears that
    nowhere does the draft mention that it is either
    the 802.3/Ethernet specific part of the packet CS
    (Ethernet CS) or the GPCS over which the Ethernet
    frames are being carried. It would be appropriate
    to state this.
  • GPCS
  • Using the GPCS, the classification and Packet
    Header Suppression (PHS) of higher layer packets
    to particular service flows is performed outside
    the 802.16 convergence sublayer and is indicated
    to the convergence sublayer through the use of a
    service flow ID and subscriber station MAC
    address that the 802.16 convergence sublayer uses
    to identify a related CID.
  • Multicast CIDs
  • The second paragraph of Appendix A implies that a
    standardized means of establishing and
    maintaining multicast CIDs is needed. IEEE Std
    802.16 already provides this. It is the
    association with Layer 3 traffic that is not
    defined in the 802.16 standard.
  • MBS
  • In the second paragraph of Appendix A, The term
    multicast and broadcast can be easily confused
    with MBS (multicast broadcast service). It would
    be appropriate to clarify the difference.
  • Ongoing Work
  • In the second paragraph of Appendix A, we suggest
    that the forward looking statement "Such a
    protocol is not yet available but under
    development by the Networking Working Group of
    the WiMAX Forum." is not appropriate for a
    standards RFC.

6
draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802.16-05.t
xt
  • 1. Updated "Introduction" on CS (Convergence
    Sublayer) for IP over Ethernet transport
  • A new paragraph has been added to the
    "Introduction" so that it introduces which CS can
    be used for transport of IP over Ethernet
    packets.
  • 2. Updated "Section 4.2" on CS for IP over
    Ethernet transport
  • Section 4.2 has been updated to state packet CSs
    over which Ethernet frames are being carried.
  • Section 4.2 describes "Ethernet CS" and "GPCS"
    for IP over Ethernet packet transmission, and
    refers to IEEE 802.16g for "GPCS".
  • 3. Clarified "Appendix A"
  • The first paragraph was removed from Appendix A
    for clarification. The term 'multicast and
    broadcast' has been edited to 'multicast or
    broadcast' to differentiate the term with
    MBS.The sentences related to standardization on
    Multicast CIDs and ongoing works in WiMAX in the
    second paragraph were edited out because it is
    confusing and inappropriate.
  • 4. I-D nits checking editorial clarification
  • Special thanks to D.J. Johnston

7
Step forward
  • I-D got meanwhile a lot of reviews
  • Very stable basic concept
  • A lot of text tweaking out of the reviews
  • Conclusion
  • I-D is ready for IESG review
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com