Doc.: IEEE 802.11-08/0596r0



IEEE P802.11

Wireless LANs

|Task Group U Meeting Minutes for |

|March 2008 Interim Session (Jacksonville, Florida USA) |

|Date: 2008-05-12 |

|Author(s): |

|Name |Affiliation |Address |Phone |email |

|Matthew Gast |Trapeze Networks |5753 W. Las Positas Blvd |+1 925 474 2273 |msg@ |

| | |Pleasanton, CA 94588 USA | | |

| | | | | |

Monday, May 12, 2008, 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM

Chair: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Monday, May 12, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 4:04 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• The agenda is document number 11-08/0536r1

• The chair showed slides titled:

o (1) " Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform"

o (2) "Patent Related Links"

o The chair read through item (3) titled "Call for Potentially Essential Patents"

• The chair requested information on essential patents, patent claims, and pending patent applications and called for letters of assurance. No response was made to the call.

o (4) "Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings"

o (5) " Resources – URLs"

o (6) " Meeting Etiquette"

• The chair reminded members to record attendance and noted that document 11-08/0058 has information about recording attendance.

Ad hoc apology

• The chair formally apologized to the task group and the host for the cancellation of the TGu ad hoc in April.

Agenda approval

• The chair called for presentations. Several presentations were added to the agenda.

• The new agenda was saved as 11-08/0536r2

• The revised agenda was approved by unanimous consent.

TG Officer Elections

• Task Group Technical Editor

o The chair called for nominations

o Necati Canpolat (affiliation: Intel Corporation) was nominated.

o No further nominations were received.

o Necati Canpolat was approved by unanimous consent.

• Task Group Secretary

o The chair called for nominations

o Matthew Gast (affiliation: Trapeze Networks) was nominated.

o No further nominations were received.

o Matthew Gast was approved by unanimous consent.

For the task group chair election, Stephen McCann passed the gavel to the secretary, Matthew Gast at 4:34 pm EDT.

• Task Group Chair

o Stephen McCann (affiliation: Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH & Co KG) was nominated.

• Necati Canpolat: The task group needs the support of its chair. In the past, your sponsor has had difficulty funding travel. What is the current situation?

• Answer: Budgetary constraints forced a choice between attending the ad hoc or this meeting in Jacksonville. The fiscal year at my sponsor ends June 30, and I have been assured that the funding will be assured through the end of the calendar year. This funding includes any ad hoc meetings that may be scheduled.

o No further nominations were received.

o Stephen McCann was renominated as task group chair to the working group by unanimous consent.

At the conclusion of the task group chair election, Matthew Gast returned the gavel to the chair, Stephen McCann, at 4:37 pm EDT.

Approval of the minutes of past meetings

• March 17, 2008 ad hoc, Orlando (11-08/0329r0)

o The chair asked for corrections; none were required

o The chair requested approval by unanimous consent

o There was no objection from the task group, so the minutes are approved

• March 2008 plenary meeting, Orlando (11-08/0363r0)

o The chair asked for corrections; none were required

o The chair requested approval by unanimous consent

o There was no objection from the task group, so the minutes are approved

• March meeting closing report 11-08/0416r0

• The chair noted the existence of the TGu/TGv ad hoc meeting notes

o No independent TGu minutes because there was no separate TGu meeting

o Two documents: 11-08/0491r1 & 11-08/446r6

o However, there are no minutes to approve as the joint meeting was an official TGv meeting.

• No official business was transacted on the scheduled teleconferences, so no minutes were taken.

Discussion of meeting objectives

• The group agreed to try to circulate another draft in a letter ballot.

• The editor noted that draft 2.01 is on the server as of 5:09 pm. Draft 2.01 incorporates all technical comment resolutions.

Document: 11-08/0326r7, Editorial Comment Resolution, Necati Canpolat

• The technical editor noted that two editorial comments require discussion

• CID 766 is labelled editorial, and is really a technical comment. After discussion, the group reclassified the comment as technical and made it part of the same group as CID 768.

• CID 751 was rejected, and reasons were entered into the comment spreadsheet.

Presentation: 11-08/0534r0, Proposal for dot11InterworkingServiceEnabled, Dave Stephenson

• Matthew Gast: On page 7, the new MIB attribute defined on page 7 is a misspelling: "dot11InterworkingServiceEnableded". I believe that it should be "dot11InterworkingServiceEnabled"

o Dave Stephenson: That is correct. The corrected text will be uploaded as 11-08/0534r1.

Motion (5:34 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0534-01-lb122-MIB-Implemented-and-Enabled.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Discussion on the motion

o Necati Canpolat: Do we need to include the CIDs addressed by this submission?

o Stephen McCann: We typically approve the document and then mark the CIDs as resolved. Would it be acceptable to list the CIDs in the document?

• Necati Canpolat proposed amending the motion with the CID. The motion was amended to the following form by unanimous consent.

Motion (revised) (5:35 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0534-01-lb122-MIB-Implemented-and-Enabled.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document. Note: refers to CID 148"

• Discussion on the motion:

o Question: What is the difference between r0 and r1.

▪ Answer: The fix of the typo identified by Matthew Gast.

• The motion was adopted by unanimous consent.

• Motion passes.

Hongseok Jeon was not available to present on the SME mobility manager, so this presentation will be deferred.

Comment Resolution

• The comment spreadsheet is 11-08/0326. The current revision is revision 8.

• Discussion of bucket 30 deferred.

• CID 38

o Resolution: Reject. There is only reason for the link to come up, so reason codes are not necessary. Conditions for the link to come up are described 21.3.1.2.

o Added to comment group 6.

• CID 43

o Dave Stephenson: This is a biographical reference, not a normative reference. Therefore, it is acceptable to reject the comment. However, do not mark this comment as completed until George Bumiller returns to the task group.

• CID 48

o Dave Stephenson: This was the subject of a rejected presentation.

• CID 56

o Dave Stephenson: These are mSSID comments which are resolved by the potential adoption of draft 2.01.

• CID 59

o Necati Canpolat: This is an mSSID-related comment.

o Temporary resolution: This comment is tentatively rejected by the proposed mSSID resolution, and it is placed in the mSSID category.

• Revised spreadsheet to be saved as 11-08/0326r9.

The meeting recessed at 6:00 pm.

Monday, May 12, 2008, 7:30 PM to 9:30 PM

Chair: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order

Meeting called to order on Monday, May 12, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 7:37 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

Presentation: 11-08/0595r0, Re-direct URL, Dave Stephenson

• Stephen McCann: There needs to be a length for the Redirect URL so that the receiver can parse the fields.

o Dave Stephenson: That is correct.

• Gabor Bajko: The Native GAS query is to find out whether the network is chargeable or not. How does this help do that?

o Dave Stephenson: If the network is chargeable, there are some URLs that will go through the AP even though the network is chargeable. By putting this into the native GAS query, the client can get the URL directly. The machine can autonomously fetch the URL and present it immediately.

• Gabor Bajko: This saves only one HTTP round-trip, so it does not dramatically improve the performance.

o Dave Stephenson: If the web authentication back end is selective, some HTTP Gets will go through and some won't.

• Gabor Bajko: The URL returned here is free to the user. Why is that useful?

o Necati Canpolat: You need to have the web page displayed so you get all the information.

• Mike Montemurro: Is this proposal targeted at non-browser devices? This is a good idea because it gives a URL to devices without a good browser service, and helps them to get on the network.

• Matthew Gast: Is this really solving a problem? URLs that don't get redirects are meant to be free. There is no need to challenge the user.

• Gabor Bajko: No matter what URL you type in, you get redirected to the same page. This does not add any value.

o Mike Montemurro: This problem would be easy to solve if there were only way to do this. There are 3-4 methods that do this, and not all rely on HTTP 3xx redirects.

o Dave Stephenson: Not all URLs redirect.

o Gabor Bajko: Even if you configure the URL and get a browser, that request may still be redirected, e.g. for load balancing. There is complicated network architecture that may prevent this proposal from working.

• Necati Canpolat: There are two scenarios: (1) in the cluster case, you hijack the session when a browser is launched, and (2) instead of a locally configured session hijack, there is a predetermined central authentication URL.

o Gabor Bajko: This still only saves one round trip in the best case.

o Dave Stephenson: this gives you a simple way to get authenticated straight away.

• Mike Montemurro: In 3GPP, you need to connect to the network, make an HTTP request, get rejected and then move on to another network.

o Matthew Gast: You still need to connect to network & get an IP address once you see the network. Does this save steps?

o Mike Montemurro: You could match it against a profile to automatically log a user in.

• Stephen McCann: This proposal gives the user a URL before an IP address. Does this make sense?

• Gabor Bajko: This is not necessary because you end up at the landing page anyway. In 3GPP, you don't use a URI.

o Dave Stephenson: Then contention that "whatever you put in, you wind up on the landing page" is incorrect. Some sites will allow free access to a few sites, but charge for the majority of sites.

o Gabor Bajko: Credentials must be protected, not sent over a cleartext link.

o Mike Montemurro: Credentials are sent over HTTPS.

o Gabor Bajko: Using HTTPS requires an IP address. This proposal does not help with automation.

• Mike Montemurro: The real issue is that hotspots require layer 3 authentication, and you have to deal with it.

Motion (8:13 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0595-00-000u-lb122-redirect-url.doc, with the addition of a 2 octet length field for the resource URL in Figure 7-95bk and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Mike Montemurro

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 4 for – 1 against – 3 abstentions.

• Motion passes (80%)

Presentation: 11-08/0572r0, Advertisement Protocol Update, Dave Stephenson

• No questions on the presentation.

Motion (8:20 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0572-00-000u-lb122-apie-update.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Mike Montemurro

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 4 for – 0 against – 2 abstentions.

• Motion passes (100%)

Presentation: 11-08/0574r0, Miscellaneous GAS Update, Dave Stephenson

• No questions on the presentation.

Motion (8:29 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0574-00-000u-lb122-gas-update.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Mike Montemurro

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 5 for – 0 against – 2 abstentions.

• Motion passes (100%)

Comment Resolution

• CIDs 692, 691, 718, and 689 were resolved by the three presentations approved in this session. They were assigned to comment group 7.

• The comment spreadsheet was uploaded as 11-08/0326r9.

• Spreadsheet merging

o Dave Stephenson noted that the master spreadsheet was missing proposed resolutions previously proposed. Dave Stephenson supplied a spreadsheet of the missing proposed resolutions.

o Group6 in r9 the spreadsheet was reassigned to group 8, and group 6 was used for the proposed resolutions.

o The spreadsheet was uploaded as 11-08/0326r10.

• The group worked on resolving comments, and the comments for which resolutions were proposed were placed in group 9.

• In discussion of comment bucket 148, the following straw poll was taken:

Straw poll (9:33 pm): "Do you think that having extended capability bits for QoS Mapping, EBR, and Interworking Enabled" is a good idea?"

• Vote: 6 yes – 0 no

The meeting recessed at 9:35 pm.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 10:30 AM to 12:30 PM

Chairs: Dorothy Stanley and Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order for TGu/TGv session and agenda

Meeting called to order on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 by Dorothy Stanley at 10:34 am Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

• The agenda is a single document: 11-08/0491r2

• The chair showed slides titled:

o (1) " Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform"

o (2) "Patent Related Links"

o (3) "Call for Potentially Essential Patents"

o (4) "Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings"

o (5) " Resources – URLs"

o (6) " Meeting Etiquette"

• The chair requested information on essential patents, patent claims, and pending patent applications and called for letters of assurance.

o No response was made to the call.

Ad hoc recommendations on multiple SSIDs

• Minutes from the ad hoc meeting in April 2008 are in 11-08/0446r6

• Dick Wright: Under the proposed way forward on slide 5, it says "maintains a single STA-BSSID-AP-BSS-DS structure." Do I understand that that BSSID-SSID associations are tightly coupled?

o Dave Stephenson: That is correct

• Dick Wright: If the AP can have multiple BSSIDs, can a single STA have multiple BSSIDs?

o Dave Stephenson: That is not correct. The TGv multi-SSID mechanism allows an efficient Beacon transmission of multiple BSSIDs. But a non-AP STA/A P pair still only has one association at one time.

• Dick Wright: Why is that restriction required?

o Dave Stephenson: This is a discussion of a logical device. A single MAC address associated with one AP must disconnect from any prior APs. The network maintains one association.

• Dick Wright: How does the second AP know that a non-AP STA is associated with the other AP? I question that statement. Why can't my laptop talk to two APs at once? Anybody can receive that frame, and the BSSID is only a frame filtering field in the frame. What prohibits that?

o Sudheer Matta: Nothing prohibits you from doing that. The standard does not prohibit it. A STA that associates to 10 APs must maintain per-BSSID state for each AP.

o Dick Wright: That is in direct conflict with the bullet point on slide 5. Also, I remember reading in the standard that one association is mandatory.

o Dorothy Stanley: There is no intent on the part of TGu or TGv to change the single association binding of an AP to BSSID. If you believe that should happen, it must be addressed in a different forum.

o Sudheer Matta: For the current baseline standard, the statement is correct.

o Dave Stephenson: Infrastructure devices often send mssages over the DS to ensure that a single non-AP STA can associate with only one AP at a time. You want to prevent a single OTA frame from being bridged multiple times simultaneously.

o Dorothy Stanley: The bullet point describes the structure of a logical AP. The "STA" is the STA in an AP, not a non-AP STA.

• Sudheer Matta: I support the outcome of this discussion.

Motion (10:55 am): "The ad-hoc recommendation on the proposed way forward, as described in slides 5 & 6 of 08-0491-02 shall be used by TGu and TGv to amend their drafts."

• Moved by Mike Montemurro, seconded by Dave Stephenson

• Discussion on the motion

o Dick Wright: The proposed way forward should be labeled clearly and referring only to the bullets on slide 5.

• Vote: 15 in favor – 0 opposed – 3 abstensions

• Motion passes (100%)

Seeing no other business, the joint meeting adjorned at 11:01 am.

Call to order for TGu session and agenda

Meeting called to order on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 11:27 am Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

Motion (11:29 am): "Move to approve IEEE 802.11u draft D2.01, updated with recommendation changes from the joint TGu/TGv Ad Hoc on 30th April 2008."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by Dave Stephenson

• No discussion on the motion

• Vote: 5 for, 0 against, 0 abstensions

• Motion passes (100%)

Meeting adjourned 12:32 pm.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 7:30 PM to 9:30 PM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 7:33 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

• The agenda is document number 11-08/0536r2.

o In response to a call for presentations and agenda items, the agenda was modified. 11-08/0536r3 was adopted by unanimous consent.

Presentation: 11-08/0600r1: Consolidated of Network Selection Elements, Necati Canpolat

• Stephen McCann: Where are QoS Map & EBR?

o Dave Stephenson: They are now negoatiated, and no longer appear in these elements. They are in the extended capabilities element.

• Gabor Bajko: What happened to EBR and QoS Map?

o Stephen: 11k, 11y, and 11v use an extended capabilities information element to store capability information.

• Gabor Bajko: Where is the ESO bit?

o Matthew Gast: Emergency services has become a network tyhpe code, and is no longer a capability bit.

• Gabor Bajko: We should move the intranet/internet bit into the network type field

o Necati Canpolat: That decision is not affected by this presentation.

o Dave Stephenson: That action would disallow the museum use case. If network is free, then you check internet/intranet bit to determine if it offers full or restricted access.

• Mike Montemurro: What about networks that require users to accept terms and conditions?

o Matthew Gast: That case is handled aready by the NASR bit.

• Gabor Bajko: Saying "free intranet" is a weird concept.

• Necati Canpolat: We should get rid of internet/intranet access entirely, not put it in the table.

• Dave Stephenson: There are two ways of doing that: (1) get rid of "intranet" in the figure and make it an "internet" bit, or (2) create a new network type.

• Mike Montemurro: In a hotspot where you don't go beyond the walled garden, are you on the internet or the intranet?

o Dave Stephenson: The bit only applies to free network.

• Necati Canpolat: Would like to maintain one bit that indicates if the bit provides Internet service, and only that.

Straw poll (8:11 pm): "Regarding the 'Internet/Intranet bit in Figure 7-95ao, do you think it should (a) be changed to read 'Internet' or (b) remove it from Figure 7-95ao and add a new row to Table 7-43t entitled 'Local Network'"

• Vote: option (a) 4 votes, option (b) 5 votes, 5 abstentions

SA2 Update, George Bumiller

• Four documents were presented

o 11-08/0625r0: S2-082849 Access Network Discovery and New IEEE 802.11u "Interworking with External Networks"

o 11-08/0626r0: S2-082850 23.402 CR0226R1: Inclusion of 802.11u into network selection

o 11-08/0627r0: S2-082851 23.234 CR0169R1: Inclusion of 802.11u into network selection

o 11-08/0628r0: S2-083039 [DRAFT] Reply LS on request for recommendations (on IEEE 802.11u approach

• Gabor Bajko: What was the outcome of the CRs?

o George Bumiller: None were handled. The next steep is for CT1 to do work regarding the 802.11u draft.

• Gabor Bajko: There are two competing proposals for network selection. Both are from the IEEE. One is to use 802.21, and uses the 802.21 IS for network selection. The other is based on 11u and says to access the network in an unauthenticated state to select the network. It is pretty obvious that the choice will be for 802.21. The question is whether you want to select the network or attach to it first. They will access the network over 2G or 3G security, and then use that link to discover services securely. There is a lack of use of 802.11u in the 3GPP space.

o George Bumiller: 3GPP has set up an interworking WLAN group that has developed inefficient procedures that require association with each AP in turn.

Presentation: 11-08/0558r0, Advertisement Protocol ID for 3GPP, George Bumiller

• Matthew Gast: How many 3GPP protocols might need to be added?

o George Bumiller: It might be up to a half dozen.

• Stephen McCann: Can we drop network broadcast and make it more generic?

o George Bumiller: Discussion with 3GPP colleagues indicates that this is the most useful form.

Motion (8:55 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0553-00-000u-addition-of-3gpp-to-draft.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by George Bumiller, seconded by Dave Stephenson

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 8 in favor – 0 opposed – 2 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Comment Resolution

• The group reviewed comment group 10

o During the review process, the proposed resolution for CID 46 was modified.Modified proposed resolution to CID 46.

• After discussion, the spreadsheet was uploaded as r13.

Motion (9:12 pm): "Move to approve comment resolutions in Comment Group 10 in document 11-08-0326-13-000u-lb122-comment-spreadsheet.xls"

• Moved by Mike Montemurro, seconded by George Bumiller

• No discussion on the motion.

• Vote: 7 in favor – 0 opposed – 0 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Comment Resolution

• The group proposed resolutions for CIDs 46 & 48

• Dave Stephenson volunteered to produce a submission for CID 160.

• Revision 14 of the comment spreadsheet was uploaded

Motion (9:28 pm): "Move to approve comment resolutions in Comment Group 14 in document 11-08-0326-14-000u-lb122-comment-spreadsheet.xls"

• Moved by George Bumiller, seconded by Dave Stephenson

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 8 in favor – 0 opposed – 0 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

The meeting recessed at 9:29 pm.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 8:04 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

• The agenda is document number 11-08/0536r2.

o In response to a call for presentations and agenda items, the agenda was modified. 11-08/0536r3 was adopted by unanimous consent.

o The chair announced that votes on outstanding comment groups will be held at 1:40 pm. The outstanding comment groups are 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13

WFA Public Safety Marketing TG, Necati Canpolat

• Carl Kain suggested contacting four frequency coordinators in the USA.

• The chair requested that the presentation be uploaded as an 802.11 document instead of a Wi-Fi Alliance document.

802.1af Discussion, Necati Canpolat

• The chair volunteered to speak with the 802.1af chair.

NENA Comments, Stephen McCann

• No comments on the NENA draft.

3rd Emergency Service Workshop Update, Necati Canpolat & Gabor Bajko

• Necati Canpolat recommended that TGu continue sending delegates to the emergency services workshops

Presentation: 11-08/0616r0, Roaming Consortiums, Dave Stephenson

• Matthew Gast: OUIs are not the appropriate tool for this. None of the big service providers (Boingo, iPass, T-Mobile, Vodafone) have OUIs. This proposal may lead to consortiums needing to get OUIs where they did not before. Has any consideration been given to OUI assignment?

o Matthew Gast noted the OUI list is published by the IEEE and stored at

o Answer: There was no investigation of how OUIs are assigned. We use them for VSAs, and that is not a problem.

o Matthew Gast: That's because equipment vendors need to get OUIs as a routine business matter. Service providers do not, which makes this problematic.

• Matthew Gast: A better alternative would be to have a query response, where you send a realm with native GAS and get back a response from the AP if it has access to authentication databases for that realm.

• Stephen McCann: Is there an OUI query language?

o Mike Montemurro: The terminal is preconfigured with credentials, and this gives it a way to make a pre-connect decision.

• Necati Canpolat: Is the usage model limited to hot spots? Can it be used with enterprise networks?

o Answer: Enterprise systems are typically preconfigured with user credentials and not under control of the user.

• Matthew Gast: Another problem with using OUIs is that consortium membership is fluid. Companies may join and leave consortia. In the dial-up world, these moves are things that require updating dialer software. This proposal will force updates into wireless driver software to cope with roaming consortiums.

o Answer: This query should not be expanded. Complex queries are what 802.21 is for. The organization administering terminals needs to have a provisioning service keeping OUIs up to date.

• Stephen McCann: A description of this proposal should go into a 3GPP liaison.

• Allan Thomson: What does "other OUI" field mean? If it is zero, does that mean there is only one roaming consortium.

o Answer: No, that means more are available via native GAS.

o Allan Thomson: Suggest "# of native GAS OUIs" as an alternate name.

• Stephen McCann: Since Beacon bloat is a concern of this proposal, are there plans to create a beacon bloat study group?

Motion (9:16 am): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0616-00-000u-lb-122-roaming-consortium.doc with a change of the 'number of other OUIs' to 'number of Native GAS OUIs' together with changing the roaming consortium list to contain the full set of OUIs, and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, Mike Montemurro

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 7 for – 0 against – 3 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%).

Presentation: 11-08/0600r2, Consolidated Network Selection Elements, Necati Canpolat

• Necati Canpolat: The only change in this version is that the Internet/Intranet bit has been renamed to the "Internet" bit.

• Glen Zorn: Is it possible to state that a network offers emergency services without devoting it only to emergency services?

o Answer: No.

Motion (9:27 am): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0600-02-000u-consolidation-of-of-network-selection-interworking-elements.ppt and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by Mike Montemurro

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 5 for – 0 against – 2 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%).

Comment Resolution

• The task group discussed comments and proposed resolutions. Proposed resolutions were added into comment group 15.

• The comment resolution spreadsheet was uploaded as 08/329r16.

The chair showed the motion on approving comment resolutions that would be voted on when the task group reconvened after lunch. With no objection, the meeting recessed at 10:00 am.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008, 1:30 PM to 3:30 PM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Wednesday, May 14, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 1:32 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

• The agenda is document number 11-08/0536r3.

o In response to a call for presentations and agenda items, the agenda was modified. 11-08/0536r4 was adopted by unanimous consent.

The chair had previously announced the scheduled vote on the following motion:

Motion (1:42 pm): "Move to approve comment resolutions in Comment Groups 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15 in document 11-08-0326-16-000u-lb122-comment-spreadsheet.xls"

• The chair noted these were proposed comment resolutions in the areas of GAS, QoS, SSPN, ES, MIH, and some miscellaneous comments, worked on by TGu members at the end of the March 2008 meeting, at the April 2008 ad hoc, and the first half of the May 2008 meeting.

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by George Bumiller

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 4 for – 0 against – 1 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Motion (1:47 pm): "Move to approve IEEE 802.11u draft D2.02, updated with the majority of the editorial comment resolutions from LB122."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by Dave Stephenson

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 6 for – 0 against – 0 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Presentation: 11-08/0592r1, ES Access, Gabor Bajko

• Stephen McCann: Didn't we used to have two types of ES networks?

o Dave Stephenson: Yes. But if there is an RSN in the Beacon or Probe Response, the network is encrypted. If there is no RSN, then it is open access.

• Dave Stephenson: Credentials are stored in the AP because it is one less thing to go wrong. Gaining access to emergency services does not depend on a back-end WAN.

o Gabor Bajko: If you have an ES, you can put the information in the backend. That means that if you have no 802.21 IS, you must build an ESO network.

o Matthew Gast: Public credentials also provide RSN protections like anti-replay, anti-spoofing, and source address integrity.

• Dave Stephenson: Can you store credentials in an IS?

o Gabor Bajko: Yes. IS can also be queried securely if you have protocol security.

• Gabor Bajko: The LoST database is populated by the PSAP, so it is authenticated data known to be good.

• Stephen: Do these proposals create a dependency on either LoST or IS servers running?

o Gabor Bajko: Yes, but it is well understood how to build redundant Internet infrastructure so that will not be a problem.

• Gabor Bajko: There are three problems with storing credentials on the AP. (1) credentials must be configured, and errors are subject to liability, (2) the administrator needs to know the emergency dial string, and (3) there is a need to reconfigure the AP when it is moved to a new location.

• Gabor Bajko: Many phones implement GPS.

o Stephen McCann: Liability with GPS is very challenging because GPS operation is not guaranteed.

Straw poll (2:31): "Do you think that the emergency service public credentials information element should be removed from TGu draft and given to IEEE 802.21?"

• Vote: 2 for – 0 against – 5 abstentions

Straw poll (2:36): "Do you think that the emergency call information element should be removed from the TGu draft and instead (a) use GAS to download it from IS or (b) define an advertisement ID for the LoST protocol, (c) none of the above, or (d) abstain?"

• Vote: (a) 0 votes, (b) 1 votes, (c) 1 votes, (d) 6 votes

Presentation: 11-08/0340r3: GAS name change, Gabor Bajko

• No comments on the presentation.

Presentation: 11-08/0649r0: Extended Capabilities, Dave Stephenson

• Stephen McCann: "Coffee Shop" used in precisely that manner refers to a business that distributes drugs in the Netherlands.

• Moussa Bavafa: How many bits are in the Extended Capabilities field? Will we run out?

o Dave Stephenson: It is an IE, and can grow as needed.

Motion (3:08 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0649-00-000u-lb122-extended-capabilities.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 4 in favor – 0 against – 2 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Presentation: 11-08/0652r0: SSPN and QoS Update, Dave Stephenson

• Several minor typos were noted by the group, and the presentation was updated to r1 and uploaded.

Motion (3:24 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0652-01-000u-sspn-and-qos-update.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by George Bumiller

• No debate on the motion.

• Vote: 4 in favor – 0 against – 1 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Comment Resolution

• 11-08/329r16 has updated the editor status field

• Proposed resolutions were placed in comment group 16.

• At the conclusion of comment resolution, the spreadsheet was uploaded as 17.

The meeting recessed at 3:35 pm.

Thursday, May 15, 2008, 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Thursday, May 15, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 8:05 am Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

Comment Resolution

• 11-08/326r20

• Group 17: Dave GAS comments

• Group 18: GAS comments assigned to Matthew

• Group 19: Dave Others

• Group 20: Stephen ES

• Group 21: Dave Others #2

• Group 22 will be used for comments resolved in this session.

• CIDs 742 & 745

o George Bumiller proposed the following resolution: "A generic container refers to a field for which the format and contents are defined by an organization other than IEEE 802.11."

o Dave Stephenson suggested that the field be added as a definition to clause 3.

o Necati Canpolat stated that the draft should not define obvious terms.

o A straw poll indicated slight support for adding the definition by a vote of 3 in favor and 3 opposed.

o The chair suggested that the straw poll indicated support for adding the definition.

Motion (8:47 am): "Move that a definition for 'generic container' be added to the IEEE 802.11u draft, as opposed to leaving it as a resolution in the comment resolution spreadsheet 11-08-0326r21."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by George Bumiller

• Debate on the motion

o Necati Canpolat argued that with only one commenter was confused and spoke against the motion.

o George Bumiller supported Necati Canpolat.

• Vote: 3 in favor – 3 opposed – 1 abstention.

• Motion fails (50%).

Comment Resolution

• 11-08/326r20

• Discussion of CID 779

o Dave Stephenson: The reason for a 2-octet length field in the native query was originally the length of ssid container elements. Multiple ssids have been removed, and that is no longer a prime concern. Most of the elements are shorter than the 256-byte limit. The major exception is the redirect url.

o Matthew: redirect URLs may include parameters like MAC address or site name.

o Group thought everything was fine.

o Comment to be rejected.

• Group 22 assigned.

• Comment resolutions uploaded as r21.

Thursday, May 15, 2008, 10:30 AM to 12:30 PM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Thursday, May 15, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 10:31 am Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

Comment Resolution

• The starting version of the comment resolution document is 11-08/326r21.

• Comments discussed in this session were assigned to comment group 23

• To maximize parallelism, revision 22 of the spreadsheet was uploaded to allow division of the work.

o Matthew Gast's proposed resolutions were placed in comment group 25.

o Dave Stephenson's proposed resolutions were placed in comment group 26.

o Stephen McCann's proposed resolutions were placed in comment group 27.

The task group recessed at 10:58 am to into ad hoc mode to propose comment resolutions.

The meeting returned to order at 12:09 pm.

• The merged comment resolution spreadsheet was uploaded as revision 23.

• The group proposed resolutions comments and assigned those proposed revisions to comment group 23.

• Revision 24 of the comment spreadsheet was uploadsed at the end of the meeting period.

The meeting recessed at 12:32 pm.

Thursday, May 15, 2008, 1:30 PM to 3:30 PM

Chairs: Stephen McCann

Recording secretary: Matthew Gast

Call to order and agenda

Meeting called to order on Thursday, May 15, 2008 by Stephen McCann at 1:30 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). The chair then reviewed the following topics from the agenda:

• Attendance reminder

• The chair noted that motions would be stored in 08/05380

Teleconferences

After discussion of potential teleconference dates, the following motion was made:

Motion (1:33 pm): "Move to approve the following IEEE 802.11u teleconferences:

June 5, 2008 at 10:00 ET

July 2, 2008 at 10:00 ET"

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No discussion of the motion

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent.

Ad hoc

After discussion of potential ad hoc dates, the following motion was made:

Motion (1:35 pm): " Move to approve an IEEE 802.11u Ad Hoc in Southampton, Hampshire, UK on June 18th – June 20th 2008, hosted by Nokia Siemens Networks."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by George Bumiller

• No discussion of the motion

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent

Extension of time

The following motion was made:

Motion (1:36 pm): "Move to extend the limit of the IEEE 802.11u meeting on Thursday 15 May 2008 to 15:55 ET, as opposed to 15:30 ET."

• Moved by Necati Canpolat, seconded by George Bumiller

• No discussion of the motion

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent

Comment Resolution

• The task group reclassified CID 535 as editorial, which empowered the editor to resolve it

• Dave Stephenson indicated he had a pending presentation to address CIDs 563 & 674

• Comments discussed by the group were placed in group 28.

Presentation: 11-08/0652r2, Proposal to Update SSPN and QoS Features, Dave Stephenson

• No questions on the presentation.

Motion (1:57 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0652-02-000u-sspn-and-qos-update.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No debate on the motion

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent

Presentation: 11-08/0671r0, "Other" Category CID Resolutions, Dave Stephenson

• Matthew Gast: what comments does this address?

o Dave Stephenson: CIDs 203 & 190

Motion (2:02 pm): "Move that IEEE 802.11u approves document 11-08-0671-00-000u-lb122-other-category-cids.doc and requests the technical editor to incorporate it into the IEEE 802.11u draft document."

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No debate on the motion

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent

Comment Resolution

• The task group continued discussing comments marked for discussion and placed proposed resolutions in comment group 28.

• The task group reviewed proposed comment resolutions that had not been placed into groups and put them in comment group 30.

Motion (3:27 pm): "Move to approve comment resolutions in Comment Groups 16 through 30 inclusive (except 24 and 29) in document 11-08-0326-25-000u-lb122-comment-spreadsheet.xls"

• Note: These are proposed comment resolutions in the areas of GAS, QoS, SSPN, ES, MIH, and the remaining miscellaneous ones, worked on by TGu members during the May 2008 meeting.

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No discussion on the motion.

• The motion was approved by unanimous consent.

Motion (3:28 pm): "Having approved comment resolutions for all of the comments received from LB122 on Draft 2.0 and instructed the 802.11u editor to create Draft 3.0, ask the WG to approve a 15-day WG Letter Ballot asking the procedural question 'Should 802.11u Draft 3.0 be forwarded to WG Letter Ballot?'

"If successful, then ask the WG to begin as soon as possible, a 30 day Working Group Letter ballot asking the technical question 'Should 802.11u Draft 3.0 be forwarded to Sponsor Ballot?'"

• Moved by Dave Stephenson, seconded by Necati Canpolat

• No debate on the motion

• Vote: 4 for – 0 against – 2 abstentions

• Motion passes (100%)

Liaison Issues

• George Bumiller stated that he was preparing a response to 3GPP's liaison, and that the document number is 11-08/0681.

• The chair indicated that if the document was prepared, he would bring a personal motion for approval at the closing plenary.

Timeline

• The task group reviewed the timeline, and did not propose any changes.

The meeting adjourned at 3:39 pm.

-----------------------

Abstract

This document contains the minutes of the IEEE 802.11 Task Group U (Interworking with External Networks) meeting at the May 2008 IEEE 802 interim session in Jacksonville, Florida, USA.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download