doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 1 May 2004 Handover scenarios and requirements Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew (Panasonic) IEEE th May 2004

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 2 May 2004 Network relationships – example from 3GPP Assumptions: WLAN1(s) interworked with 3GPP-H (HPLMN); WLAN2(s) interworked with 3GPP-V(VPLMN); WLAN3(s) not interworked. StateDescriptionWLAN Coverage3GPP PLMN Coverage 1Switch onNo coverage 2Single network WLAN1 coverage Coverage only available from WLAN1(s) No coverage 3Overlapping 3GPP & WLAN coverage Single network coverageHome network coverage 4Single network 3GPP-H coverage (HPLMN) No coverageHome network coverage 5Multiple networks 3GPP coverage No coverageCoverage from home network and other operator(s) 6Network(s) 3GPP-V coverage (VPLMN) No coverageCoverage from visited network(s) only 7Overlapping 3GPP & WLAN coverage Coverage only available from WLAN2(s) Coverage from visited network only 8Multiple 3GPP & Multiple WLANs WLAN1(s) & WLAN2(s) (NOTE 1): Coverage from Home and Visited Networks 9Multiple WLAN coverageCoverage available from WLAN1(s) & WLAN2(s) No coverage 10Single WLAN2 network coverage Coverage only available from WLAN2(s) No coverage 11Multiple WLAN coverageCoverage available from WLAN1 & WLAN3 No coverage 12WLAN(s) coverage not interworked Coverage only available from WLAN3(s) No coverage NOTE 1 : May also include WLAN 3 (Not Illustrated)

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 3 May 2004 Handover scenarios Handover Case I: handover to a directly connected network Handover Case II: Handover to network indirectly connected * No point to study cases where the two network are not connected, since the MT anyway would not have access to the old session in the new network

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 4 May 2004 Relationship to home network Relationship Case II: handover from Home to a foreign network Handover Case I: Handover from a foreign network to another foreign network * all cases need to be supported The difference lies in the network discover/handover decision, and access control, enforcement part Relationship Case III: handover from foreign network to a foreign network Indirectly connected to the home network

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 5 May 2004 Handover aims at: (scope) Mainly on Dual/multi-mode terminal: –Single mode is just an extreme case, and should be covered by the solution. Seamless handover: –Simultaneous connectivity / multi-homing needs to be addressed –Session needs to be continuous, otherwise, no different than cases without.21 (not break- stop- make) Support more than generic IP connectivity –Where is the limit? How fast is sufficient. Requirements come from the services to be supported –Handover should support services provided in a specific network, e.g. corporate VPN access, 3G services (IMS) access, etc. –Delay/loss sensitive applications, e.g. VoIP, streaming, etc should be supported

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 6 May 2004 Handover steps Discovery of new network/decision on handover –Trigger information/network discovery information would be used in decision making –In certain case, the decision making is absent, e.g. forced break, lost connection, etc –.21 triggers, network discovery solutions is suitable here. Access control of the new network –Security schemes to be carried out, e.g. 11i, 1x, etc –Depends on individual technology, needs to be solved in each WG –Most work has already been carried out/standardized in individual WG. Data path establishment over new network –Requires policy and QoS enforcement, e.g. handover from to may mean QoS change –Different comes from the network operators and technologies –E.g. layer 2/3 tunnel, VPN, etc needs to be carried out –.21 could work on standard way of enforcement control, QoS mapping control, etc –Detail implementation still needs to be done in individual WG, e.g..11 and.3 has different QoS schemes Data Session transition (from old interface to new interface) –Actual data being sent over the new path –.21 could provide trigger for the upper layer transition/decision, etc

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 7 May 2004 Handover requirements Security –It shall not compromise security of a network when a terminal handover from a network of lower security level –Security schemes in individual access technology should be reused (decided by the PAR) Enforcement of policy –It shall be possible to enforce policy regarding the service access by the MT –It shall be possible to apply consistent policy across all networks the MT handover to according to its subscription at home network QoS –It shall be possible to provide consistent QoS support in the handover –It shall be possible to map and enforce QoS requirements according to individual access technology –The QoS provided shall comply with MT’s subscription at home network

doc. : IEEE /xxxr0 Submission Cheng Hong, Tan Pek Yew Slide 8 May 2004 Motion Move to adapt contents in slide 2 to 4 into a handover scenarios section Move to incorporate contents in slide 5 into a handover scope section of the Technical Requirements draft Move to incorporate contents in slide 6 into the overview section of the Technical Requirements draft Move to incorporate contents in slide 7 into a requirement section of the Technical Requirements draft