1. July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
Wireless WG argument to support proposed AM PAR & 5 criteria
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 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.
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 and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures < ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco

2. July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
A variety of technical and practical issues suggest the 802.1AM proposal is both needed and past due
Practical issues
How can a dual or multi modal product do anything, across different access methods if they do not use even use common terms, semantics or values?
Can real co-existence or multi-system interoperability ever succeed if different systems continue to ignore just each other?
Multiple dedicated interfaces are less desirable then a common interface. Just as proprietary systems are less desirable then a standard.
Technical issues
Reconfigurable product is coming to market that can connect using different and diverse access methods and standards
A common dictionary is essential, and desirable, for effective RF management
Should any algorithm or code require multiple languages to make common decisions or just one?
Make changes to existing standards and limit future interoperability?!?
There is no exiting standard
This enables interoperability
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco

3. Simple and functional manager Complex and functional manager
July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
This depicts a 20th century central manager method. A common interface in the long run will NOT be less capable, it will be more capable
“Common” in this example for 4 systems =1/4 code,
1/4 bugs, 1/4 work, 1/4 delays, 1/4 failures, +enabling, consistency, simplicity and real co-existence, +facilitating multi systems interoperability
802.1AM
proposal
Simple and functional manager
Common
management
Interfaces that
can recognize
the neighbours
.1AM
.1AM
.1AM
.1AM
802.1AM
agent
802.1AM
agent
802.1AM
agent
802.1AM
agent
802.11
802.15
802.16
802.20
Alternate
approach
Multiple Interface
specific agents that
are being developed
today are doomed to
be inferior when
measured across the
multiple systems
802.11
agent
802.15
agent
802.16
agent
802.20
agent
Multiple dedicated interfaces that each only serve themselves
.11
.15
.16
.20
Complex and functional manager
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco

4. July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
802 should encourage the wireless WG’s to ensure wireless networks are manageable
It is important to ensure wireless networks are manageable as appropriate and possible using both central and distributed methods
Various TG’s are beginning to learn how to make manageable…
But all these efforts are focused only and exclusively on with blinders on. No effort for commonality beyond or at the 802 level!
Other wireless groups are undertaking similar but distinctly different activities with little regard for enabling cross 802 issues
Getting to work on the many complex problems of the wireless working groups is in everyone’s best interest
802.3 Ethernet greatly benefited from this relationship in the past. The wireless groups are now in a position to benefit from this relationship.
The wireless ad hoc in Cairns voted positively (23/1/15) that “…a common language is needed for wireless for communicating operational characteristics and status of dissimilar wireless systems”
As and the other wireless WG’s “learn to walk” there is clearly interest in making wireless management as easy as possible going forward
802 ExCom should continue to encourage the 802 wireless groups to work towards defining useful dedicated interfaces based on a common language whenever possible
At present is the group charged with management and Architecture across all 802. Until this charge changes, 802.1am is in the best interest of and should be supported
Next steps
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco

5. July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
Proposed straw poll at morning session of the wireless ad hoc on 18 July 2005
Straw poll
“The wireless ad hoc recommends to the wireless WG’s that the WG support the proposed 802.1AM PAR”
Proposer: Roger Durand
Result
Yes:
No:
Abstain:
Motion – wireless ad hoc
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco

6. July 2005
doc.: IEEE /0635r0
15 July 2005
Proposed motion at the plenary session of the WG on 18 July 2005
Motion
That the working group support the proposed 802.1AM PAR
Proposer: Roger Durand
Seconder:
Result
Yes:
No:
Abstain:
Motions –
Roger Durand
Andrew Myles, Cisco