|
Hi
Yaakov,
I
would suggests few updates to your proposals also based on some comments that
were made in Stockholm on this subject:
1. The
femtocells application can be based on one of the technologies already
mentioned in 3.1.1 (and in fact the 250 ppb requirement which is related to home
base stations, which is the way 3GPP calls the femtocell, is already
mentioned in this section).
In order to avoid misunderstanding, the new
section could be called 3.1.2, "Specific aspects related to
Femtocells application".
Some
rephrasing in the introductory text might also be needed (e.g. remove "presented in Section 3.1.1.x " as scenarios that assume
private network).
The
Notes related to "Private Networks" could be updated as
follows:
Note
2: assumes a private network, (this may not be true
in case of femtocells)
2. The
first point on IPSEC is based on still quite vague considerations (no real study
or test has been presented on this topic showing the actual degradation). I
would suggest to be more generic , for instance saying that the impacts on
performances due to IPSEC are under study.
3.
Regarding alternative solution to IPSEC perhaps rather than refer to "secure
links" (which in case needs to be clarified), it seems more appropriate to refer
to existing solutions (e.g. built in authentication)
The
above comments would results in updating the text as
follows:
"
3.1 Cellular
Backhauling
...
3.1.1 Cellular Backhauling Requirements
.....
3.1.2 Specific aspects related to the Femtocells application Femtocell
application may use a portion of the public and private network infrastructure
to provide connectivity and backhaul service between the femtocell device and
gateway. The use of a public network facility implies that some level of network
security is necessary, as compared to the scenarios which assume that the
connectivity and backhaul service is done over a private network (eg., see Note
(2)), typically for macrocell application. In addition the number of femtocell
devices can easily extend to hundreds of thousands, much higher than the number
of macrocells. The following requirements should be considered for femtocell
deployments:
3.1.3 Cellular Backhaul
Requirements Summary
...
"
Best
Regards
Stefano
From: tictoc-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:tictoc-bounces at ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Yaakov Stein
Sent: mercoledì 26 agosto 2009 13.37 To: tictoc at ietf.org Subject: [TICTOC] FW: Adding the Femto Synchronization requirments in requirement document From: Xie Lei
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 9:50
AM Subject: [TICTOC] Adding the Femto Synchronization requirments in
requirement document
Dear
All As the agreement in
IETF75# meeting, we decide to add the femto synchronization requirements in
requirement document. After checking the requirement document, i think, the best
way is to add a new section as following: 3.2.1
Cellular Backhauling of Femtocells Femtocell
application may use a portion of the public and private network infrastructure
to provide connectivity and backhaul service between the femtocell device and
gateway. The use of a public network facility implies that some level of network
security is necessary, as compared to the scenarios presented in Section 3.1.1.x
which assumed that the connectivity and backhaul service is done over a private
network (eg., see Note (2)), typically for macrocell application. In addition
the number of femtocell devices can easily extend to hundreds of thousands, much
higher than the number of macrocells. The following requirements should be
considered for femtocell deployments:
Please
give your comments on these words, Thanks Best
Regards Rock |