xx-00-XXXX IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN: Title: Workflow for IEEE Specification work Date Submitted: July, 11, 2005 Presented at IEEE session #9 in San Francisco Authors or Source(s): Yogesh Bhatt, Qiaobing Xie, Hong-Yon Lach, Alistair Buttar Abstract: This submission proposes a workflow for IEEE to adopt to identify and resolve inconsistencies in the current baseline draft specification.

xx-00-XXXX IEEE presentation release statements This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE Working Group. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE The contributor is familiar with IEEE patent policy, as outlined in Section 6.3 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual and in Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE Standards Development Section 6.3 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manualhttp://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3

xx-00-XXXX Workflow for IEEE Specification work Yogesh Bhatt, Qiaobing Xie, Hong-Yon Lach, Alistair Buttar Motorola Inc

xx-00-XXXX Workflow for enhancing draft spec Ref. Models MIH_SAP Primitive 1: semantics, syntax, attributes, rules for invoking and handling, transport needs, etc. Other SAPs Primitive 1: semantics, syntax, attributes, rules for invoking and handling, transport needs, etc. Other SAPs 1. Make sure that SAPs are in consistency with ref. models. 3. The results of the workflow will be used to elaborate the functional descriptions in the draft specification - this may require certain sections to be rewritten. 2. Make sure each primitive and its definition details are consistent with the ref. models. If not, we need to ask whether the primitive is the right thing to do, or the ref. model need to be fixed.

xx-00-XXXX Proposed Section 7 Outline (with consistency to ref. models) 7. MIH SAPs and Primitives 7.1 Introduction 7.2 MIH_SAP and its Primitives (this is the only thing truly media independent) 7.3 SAPs for interface MIH_MAC_SAP LSAP (or MIH_LSAP) 7.4 SAPs for interface MIH_MAC_SAP LSAP (or MIH_LSAP) MIH_MGMT_SAP MIH_ME_SAP 7.5 SAPs for interface CS_SAP (or MIH_CS_SAP) MIH_MGMT_SAP MIH_ME_SAP 7.6 SAPs for 3GPP interface MIH_RRC_SAP MIH_MGMT_SAP 7.7 SAPs for 3GPP2 interface MIH_PPP_SAP MIH_LAC_SAP MIH_MGMT_SAP

xx-00-XXXX Examples of Consistency Check between Ref. Models and SAPs (1) 1)Figure 5 “MIH Reference Model for ” shows MIH_MAC_SAP between MIHF and MAC: Inconsistency: This SAP is not defined in the spec. Fix: Add a subsection in Section 7 that defines “MIH_MAC_SAP to MAC” 2)Section 7.2 defines MIH_MGMT_SAP Primitives: Inconsistency: Section 7.2 does not say whether this is the MIH_MGMT_SAP between MIHF and as shown in Fig. 5, or the MIH_MGMT_SAP between MIHF and as shown in Fig. 6, or the one shown in Fig. 7, or the one shown in Fig. 8. Fix: A separate MIH_MGMT_SAP must be defined for each scenario (in separate subsection in Section 7). If some or all of them are identical, the spec must say so.

xx-00-XXXX Examples of Consistency Check between Ref. Models and SAPs (2) 3) Section 7.3 defines MIH_SME_SAP Primitives: Inconsistency: No MIH_SME_SAP is shown in any reference model (only MIH_ME_SAP in Figure 5). Fix: Need to fix either the ref. model or ) Section defines MIH_Poll.request as part of MIH_SAP: Inconsistency: As part of MIH_SAP, the receiving entity of this primitive must by MIHF according to the ref. models, what is the expected behavior of the MIHF upon receiving this primitive from the upper layer? Fix: Re-define “Effect of receipt” of the primitive - it must talk about the actions/behaviors of the destination MIHF (not the MAC which is not the recipient of this primitive).