Hello all, So sorry, I make a mistake, I confuse all of you with another WG's document.
BRs Chunshan Xiong -----Original Message----- From: dmm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hidetoshi Yokota Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 8:05 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DMM] MPTCP Proxy for Mobile Networks Hi Chunshan, Isn't this I-D for MPTCP WG (although it is somewhat related to DMM)? Regards, -- Hidetoshi Yokota KDDI R&D Laboratories, Inc. e-mail:[email protected] (2014/02/21 16:18), Xiongchunshan (Sam) wrote: > > Hello folks, > > Here I have some comments on this document: > > 1) > > 5.2 Traffic mediation > > (a) Anchoring of sub-flow traffic: On one hand, it is not always > > possible for a single GW be sitting on the path of every sub-flow > > from a MPTCP session, hence explicit traffic anchoring to enable a > > single point of general control over MPTCP sub-flows should be > > considered. > > (b) Mediation of sub-flow traffic: On the other hand, for fine- > > grained mediation of sub-flow traffic, both static and dynamic > > selection/offloading/pooling policies should be allowed. For > > instance, "always prefer Wi-Fi over 3GPP" could be a static policy > > for bulk data transfer services, while "use 3GPP only for backup > > unless Wi-Fi is congested" could be a dynamic offloading policy for a > > un-prioritized VoIP service. > > [xcs]Question for clarification: How does the MPTCP proxy know the > binding information between the IP and RAT ? The mobile node knows > which IP is allocated from which RAT, but it is very hard for the > MPTCP Proxy in the core network to know these mapping information. > > One possible solution is the PCRF (defined in the 3GPP) to provide > these binding information to the MPTCP proxy if the MPTCP proxy > performance the traffic mediation or let the mobile to do the traffic > mediation. > > Another question is how the rules (e.g. "always prefer Wi-Fi over > 3GPP") are provided to the MPTCP Proxy or the mobile ? For the MPTCP > proxy, it is again the PCRF; for the mobile , it is the ANDSF ? > > 2) > > 4.2 Resource pooling for reduced expense > > Due to its low construction and operation expenses, Wi-Fi has been > > adopted by mobile operators as a complementary RAT for their > > traditional 3GPP networks. However, different construction and > > operation expenses of various radio networks result in differences in > > charging rates/policies for different RATs. > > For instance, Wi-Fi access may be charged by the access duration, > > while the 3GPP access may be charged by the consumed data volume. > > Even if using the same policy, Wi-Fi service is expected to be much > > cheaper than 3GPP data service. > > Moreover, different subscription packages may offer various data > > plans for various RATs. For instance, a basic 4G package may contain > > free data volume as well free Wi-Fi access too. > > By enabling MPTCP session between UE and network proxy, via mediating > > sub-flow data traffic based on their Radio access types and the > > user’s subscription package, it is possible to further reduce the > > usage expenses from both sides of the network and user. > > [xcs] it will benefit the user if the user’s expense of data usage is > reduced, if the WiFi connection is available and charging fee is very > low, maybe all the traffic from the 4G are moved to the WiFi by the > MPTCP proxy, and the mobility and QoS of the service maybe aren’t > ensured, so it is proposed to adding the following sentence to the end > of this chapter: > > *The QoS/QoE/Service continuity of the current data services are still > kept when the MPTCP proxy is used to reduce the user’s usage > expenses.* > > A assumption for reducing user expense is that the WiFi connection is > activated beforehand, but sometimes the WiFi connection isn’t > activated or a wrong WiFi AP is selected by the user( that MPTCP Proxy > can’t access the WiFi IP flow), that is, one hand, the network need to > control the MPTCP Proxy to mediate the IP flows, another hand, the > network should tell the mobile to open which RAT/WiFi to make the > MPTCP Proxy work. i.e. the network should provide some information to > the UE , to guide the UE to select and open another RAT to enable the > MPTCP. > > 3) > > 4.1 Dynamic traffic offloading based on network information > > For real-time interactive services with higher QoS requirements it is > > expected that 3GPP network can provide better guarantees on the > > average case. For bulk data transfer who is satisfied with best- > > effort delivery, Wi-Fi would be a great choice. But the vertical > > partition does not fit everywhere for the wireless condition itself > > is quite dynamic and hard to predict. It is important to implement > > adaptive offloading mechanisms in order to achieve higher resource > > utility with ever changing radio environment for a possibly moving > > terminal based on network status, e.g. cell load, AP’s signal > > intensity, user’s subscription type, etc. > > [xcs]The same question from 1): How does the MPTCP Proxy/UE know the > network status ? The PCRF/ANDSF provides these information to the > MPTCP Proxy/UE ? > > BRs > > Chunshan Xiong > > Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. > > > > _______________________________________________ > dmm mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
