Current status and a way of

finalizing NGN R2 Reqts

CJK-9 NGN-WG (April 8-10, 2009)

TTC

Masato Yamanishi <myamanis@bb.softbank.co.jp>

2

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

3

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

4

Previous meeting results for R2-reqts New document structure

- C100 proposed dividing to Service-common requirements Service-specific requirements

Leaving from R2- Q3 was agreed that it is technically possible- So, next step is checking to SG13 management team and Q1

Remaining issues- 51 issues (High: 17, Medium+: 16, Medium: 18)- Could not be consented (second fail)

While many issues can be resolved in May, some should be postponed unless related contributions will be proposed.

5

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

6

Major remaining issues

Alignment with other recommendations- Some joint meeting in May- Offline discussion before May meeting may also be arranged

Clarification for vague / ambiguous text- While many issues already have default resolutions (like keep as

it is), some doesn’t have it- Contributions for such issues (without default resolutions) are

mandatory in May (otherwise, they will be simplified or postponed)

Editorial modification

7

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

8

Alignment with recommendations in Q3Alignment with approved / under approval recommendations in Q3 (if needed)

- Y.2212 (Y.MDS-req)- Y.2213 (Y.idserv-reqts)- Y.2233 (Y.ngn-account-R1)- Y.2234 (Y.ngn-openenv)- Y.1901 (Y.iptv-req) -> almost finished- Y.2807 (Y.mpls-mob)

Alignment with already mature recommendations in Q3 (if needed)

- Planed to consent in May Y.ngn-vpn Y.ngn-mcastsf

- Planed to consent in Sep Y.USN-reqts – already matured? Y.ngn-R1-account (Y.2233rev1) – already matured?

Should be resolved by

Q3 meeting in May

Should be resolved by

Q3 meeting in May

9

Alignment with approved / under approval recommendations in other Qs

- Q4 Y.2111rev1 (Y.RACF-rev1) Y.2173 (Y.mpm)

- Q5 Y.2014 (Y.NACF, not rev1)

- Q14 Y.2235 (Y.cwbs) Y.2214 (Y.cmr)

- (Which question?) Q.1762/Y.2802 (FMC reqts from SG19) Q.1706/Y.2801 (Mobility Management FW from SG19)

- Q16 (Which recommendations?)

Alignment with already mature recommendations in other Qs

- Currently, no recommendation

JM with related Qs

may be requested in M

ay

Alignment with recommendations in other Qs

10

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

11

Clarification issues without default resolution

Numbering, naming and addressing (Issue #25,26,27,28)- Current text is same as R1 with small modifications- Appendix V (come from ETSI TS 181 005) is possible

enhancement- Comments from SG17 which requests introducing directory

capabilities have not yet been implemented, also. - Default: NO RESOLUTION

Keep current text and postpone further enhancements?

Content management (Issue #37,38,64)- Current text is proposed by editors of Y.cwbs and it lists up 13

items, but Many are just name of capabilities (e.g. content acquisition or

content integration) It seems there is some duplication between first 8 and later 5 No requirement level (Mandatory, recommended or optional?)

- Default: NO RESOLUTION Leave only later 5 items? Contributions for requirement level are mandatory!!

12

Clarification issues without default resolution

Service continuity on different terminals (Issue #60)- Such continuity may result in either improved or degraded QoE

and QoS after handover.- Is the NGN required to deal with this impacts by negotiating or

renegotiating QoS parameters?- Default: NO RESOLUTION

Align with Y.MMCF?

Session handlings (Issue #61)- 3rd requirement for session handling is vague

Session handling is required to support sessions with a variety of media types (voice, video, text) and information (e.g. service specific data such as remote control, content delivery control).

- It proposed from one of CJK - Default: NO RESOLUTION

Contribution for clarification is mandatory

13

Clarification issues without default resolution

Interconnection between NGNs (Issue #17,18)- There are two types of interconnection

Connectivity-oriented interconnection Service-oriented interconnection

- Descriptions for service-oriented one are introduced after R1, but have not yet been reviewed

- Appendix V (which captured from ETSI TS 181 005) is another possible enhancements

- Default: NO RESOLUTION Keep as it is and postpone further enhancements?

Requirement level of multicast (Issue #35)- In R1, it was recommended- Mandatory or recommended in R2?- Default: NO RESOLUTION

Keep as it is?

14

Clarification issues without default resolution

Enterprise networks (Issue #14,19,30,43,44,63)- Clause 17.2 describes requirements related with enterprise

networks- Appendix IV also contains possible enhancements

Part1: comes from ECMA Part2: comes from ETSI TS 181 019

- Following sub-clauses have not been reviewed 17.2.3 Enterprise communication capabilities 17.2.5 Routing for enterprise 17.2.7 Identification for enterprise

- There is only one requirement related with QoS The NGN is required to support Communication Admission Control

on a per NGCN site basis.

- Default: NO RESOLUTION Keep as it is and postpone further enhancements?

15

Clarification issues without default resolution

Visual surveillance service (Issue #48,49,50,52)- Positioning was resolved by C-100, so now moved to clause 19.7- Editor’s note requests more concrete descriptions- Default: NO RESOLUTION

Keep as it is?

16

Agenda

1. Previous meeting results for NGN-R2-Reqts

2. Major remaining issues

3. Alignment with other recommendations

4. Clarification issues without default resolutions

5. Discussion points especially in CJK meeting

17

Discussion points which we want to resolve in this meeting

Content management (Y.cwbs experts)- Is it acceptable to summarize current items? (e.g. 13 items -> 5 items)- Is it possible to propose another contribution about requirement level

of each item?

Service continuity on different terminals (Y.MMCF experts)- Are there related descriptions in Y.MMCF?

Session handlings- Who proposed 3rd requirement in this session?- What is a intension?

Requirement level of multicast- Mandatory or Optional? (In R1, optional)

Visual surveillance service (China Telecom)- Are more concrete descriptions for each requirement needed?

18

Appendixes

19

Appendix

Clarification issues with default resolutions

User networks for NGN R2 (Issue #11,12,13)- Current text just list up 8 recommended items

- Studies for this area are undergoing in several Qs/SGs

- Default: Keep as it is

Identification Management (Issue #31)- Current text is proposed by Q16, but not reviewed

- Default: Keep as it is

Anonymous communications rejection (Issue #39)- Currently, no new requirement

- Default: Keep as it is

IPTV support (Issue #41)- Current text says

In order that IPTV services are supported by the NGN, NGN capabilities should in principle support the requirements described in Y.1901 [ITU-T Y.1901] in the context of replacing “the IPTV architecture” text with “the NGN environment” text inside the Y.1901 requirements. Specific considerations, such as which specific NGN capabilities should support the requirements identified in Y.1901 and whether these are equally applied to all IPTV services or applications, need further study.

- Default: Keep as it is

20

Appendix

Clarification issues with default resolutions (Cont.)Definitions of “break-in” and “break-out” in business trunking applications (Issue #8)

- Currently, no definitions

- Default: Keep as it is

Interconnection between NGN and NGCN (Issue #16)- Currently, it is not included

- Default: Keep as it is

Routing for enterprise (Issue #19)- Current text has not been reviewed

- Default: Keep as it is

Identification for enterprise (Issue #30)- Current text has not been reviewed

- Default: Keep as it is

Context awareness (Issue #40)- Current text has not been reviewed

- Default: Keep as it is