MEF Liaison ad-hoc session - Session #70 Potential Response to the MEF IEEE Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9) Document Number: IEEE L /0122r1 Date Submitted: Source: Peretz FederVoice: Venue: IEEE Session #70, WG Closing Plenary Base Contribution: None. Purpose: MEF Liaison letter review and response Notice: This document does not represent the agreed views of the IEEE Working Group or any of its subgroups. It represents only the views of the participants listed in the “Source(s)” field above. It is offered as a basis for discussion. It is not binding on the contributor(s), who reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: 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 Patent Policy: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE-SA Patent Policy and Procedures: and. Further information is located at <htFurther information is located at and.ateriml> and <

Liaison session Proposed Response to the MEF ( Metro Ethernet Forum) November 10, 2010 Dallas, Texas Session #70 Moderator: Peretz Feder Alcatel-Lucent IEEE L /0122r2

Liaison session addressing MEF L-letter Received liaison letter announcing second approved draft of MEF 22.1 Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement - Phase 2 “The MEF, with the input of Service Providers, is actively working on the evolution of MEF 22 and, at its October quarterly meeting, has approved a second draft for MEF 22.1 Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement, Phase 2. This draft will be balloted internally over the next several months as we work towards approval of this as a MEF technical specification in early We are circulating this approved draft to our liaison partners to socialize the content of this work in progress and to seek your input and comment on our work. We look forward to your comment on this new version of the draft (D00088_002).” Mobile BH Implementation agreements P1 (02/09): Draft Mobile BH Implementation agreements P2: IEEE /0122r2

Liaison session MEF – Cont. “The Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement identifies the requirements for MEF Ethernet Services and MEF External Interfaces for use in mobile backhaul networks based on MEF specifications. As the MEF worked to define the MBH IA, we identified a number of goals that a second phase would focus on. These goals include new mobile technologies (like LTE & WiMAX), performance recommendations, resiliency and synchronization. This version of the draft contains significant revised text on these key topics as well as a general reorganization.” Glenn Parsons (22.1 co-editor) to provide an overview of the phase 2 changes Ad hoc team to explore whether we have enough interest to provide group comments Ad hoc team to work out the logistics for submission comments by the MEF deadline (individually by 12/8) As a liaison by next meeting (before January 24 th ) IEEE /0122r2

Ad Hoc Discussion Points Glenn Parsons (MEF co- editor) attended the Ad hoc and provided the following background: – MEF 22.1 is a logical transport description from UNI to UNI and not a physical description. Phase 1 (released on Jan 2009) is addressing centralized cellular architecture (BS to controller). The phase 2 draft is addressing flatter backhaul architecture also helping BSs to communicate directly with each others (R8 or X2) using Ethernet services that meet stringent requirements – Phase 2 draft provides 4 classes of service were the top one (High plus) is intended for packet synchronization (when GPS is not supported). So in reality 3 CoS model is provided as described in MEF 23.1 – Mapping of cellular classes to the BH classes is left open per the request of the Mobile BH customers – Availability figures for the 3 (or 4) CoS will be provided before publications. High and High+ BH CoS will probably support 5 9s IEEE /0122r2

Ad Hoc Discussion Points Discussion points provided by IEEE members: – The draft needs to expand the network description – The draft needs to update table 8 with accurate traffic class description – deployment is using GPS synchronization, hence High plus CoS may not be required for deployments – Although not requested by mobile operators, we would like to see Best Recommended Practice informative section helping deployments determine the backhaul CoS that can meet the requirements of the E2E QoS network services – Parameters for low CoS seems to tight IEEE /0122r2

Ad Hoc Conclusion Expand the MEF 22.1 review to include network experts from the WiMAX Forum Schedule ad-hoc conference calls to solicit comments from interested IEEE and WF members Provide the following Liaison Response to the MEF: IEEE /0122r2

Proposed Response (1/2) To: Nan Chen, President MEF Bill Bjorkman, TC Co-Chair Lionel Florit, TC Co-Chair Subject: Response to MEF Liaison Statement announcing second approved draft of MEF 22.1 Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement Phase 2 Dear MEF President and Chairs: Thank you for your liaison statement (IEEE L _0110) of October 2010 announcing the second approved draft of MEF 22.1 Mobile Backhaul Implementation Agreement Phase 2. We would like to thank you for having Glenn Parson attend our session #70 and provide explanation and information about the MEF 22.1 draft IEEE /0122r2

Proposed Response (2/2) At the IEEE session #70 on November 10 th 2010, we reviewed draft MEF According to our understanding, the MEF specifications address an Ethernet backhaul solution that appears to be compatible with the IEEE radio interface. Therefore, we can easily envision networks that take advantage of both. However, it appears that the network between the base station and the Ethernet backhaul is outside the scope of IEEE Other organizations, such as the WiMAX Forum, address the network at this level and may be in a better position to review and comment on the MEF draft, so we are pleased to see that the WiMAX Forum also received a request to review the draft. We anticipate that the WiMAX Forum will consult with the IEEE community regarding any air interface issues related to the MEF draft and will copy us on any input to you. Subsequently, if we have additional follow up comments, we will provide detailed input by your deadline (1/24/2011). Sincerely, Roger B. Marks Chair, IEEE Working Group on Broadband Wireless Access IEEE /0122r2

Motion Authorize the TG Chair to make the motion: “To forward the content of slides 8 and 9 in L r2 as the proposed Liaison statement to the MEF in response to L /0110 and authorize the WG Chair to make any necessary editorial modifications.”