Subject: AW: [eap] Some comments on draft-groeting-netselection-results-00 .txt

From: Berg Stefan ICM Bocholt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:42:55 +0200

Hi Simone,

Thank you for your feedback. You really discovered some inconsistencies.

1) 'Roaming Agreements' and 'Mediating Networks' could be merged, that's
correct. There's only poor added value in separating the two. We just missed
to adapt the figure to the access network information elements described in
chapter 2.2.

2) Youre right, the figure only deals with mediating network information,
which is wrong. In our concepts additional network information, e.g. on
pricing and QoS, should be provided for the access network as well as for
the mediating networks.

3) In draft we didn't want to go in details of implementing and testing, so
in chapter 3.4 we only described the general test platform for the EAP
network discovery. In our testbed we proof different functionalities, which
are useful and needed for multimode devices. This includes as describes
network selection issues, but also other aspects like session based
handover.

Hope this answers your questions.
Regards,
Stefan

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Ruffino Simone [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Juli 2004 19:36
> An: Groeting Wolfgang ICM Bocholt; 
> [email-masked]; Ness Malte ICM Bocholt; Berg 
> Stefan ICM Bocholt
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Betreff: [eap] Some comments on 
> draft-groeting-netselection-results-00.txt
> 
> 
> Dear authors and all,
> 
> Very useful draft: it helps understanding possibilities and 
> problems of having additional information carried with EAP.
> 
> I would like to better clarify some points.
> 
> 1) You separate 'Roaming Agreements' and 'Mediating Networks' 
> information element. From my point of view, they could be 
> merged, since an Access Network, using MN advertising, 
> implicitly tells the client that it holds an agreement with 
> the advertised MNs. What kind of hint should RAs give to the client?
> 
> 2) In my understanding of your draft, some information 
> element (s.a. cost and QoS) can refer both to the Access 
> Network and to Mediating Networks. But reading sec. 3.2 
> (Figure 2), it seems that all the additional info is related 
> only to MNs : MN1--C1--RA1--etc. Can you clarify this ? 
> 
> 3) (in Sec. 3, implementation and testing ). What kind of 
> tests do you performed on the testbed? What kind of scenario 
> did you simulate ? I think it would be very useful to have 
> someusage example. Is it worth including it in the draft (is 
> it the right place ?) ?
> 
> Regards,
> Simone
> 
> 
> 
> Gruppo Telecom Italia - Direzione e coordinamento di Telecom 
> Italia S.p.A.
> 
> ====================================================================
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the 
> persons above and may contain confidential information. If 
> you have received the message in error, be informed that any 
> use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it 
> immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you 
> have any questions, please send an e_mail to 
> [email-masked]. Thank you 
> ====================================================================
> 
_______________________________________________
eap mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mail.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/eap