UMTS Release 99 Corrections:
33nd TSG-RAN WG2 meeting, France, 12-15 November 2002)
6 Corrections on Release '99
6.1 Incoming LSs on Release '99
Liaisons on Rel-4 are captured under Agenda Item 8.1, liaisons on Rel-5 under Agenda Item 9.1 and liaisons on Rel-6 under Agenda Item 10.1.
It was commented that that all CN working groups, RAN3, RAN4, SA1, SA2 and SA4 (i.e. nearly all 3GPP groups but RAN1, SA3 and T1/2) were meeting the same week. This may affect the handling of any urgent Liaison Statement.
6.1.1 TSG-RAN WG1
R2-023023 (R1-021446, to RAN WG2). Reply to LS (R2-022683) on conversational PS RABs ("Response LS.on Further RAB configurations"). 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1
This document was presented by Gordon Young from Hutchison 3G.
Discussion:
RAN1 have included the 0 size transport block. The final decision for the inclusion is left to RAN WG2.
Decision: We need to see the other documents on this subject in conjunction. We will come-back on it in the agenda point 6.17. 3G Hutchison have provided the Change Request.
R2-023024 (R1-02-1447, to RAN WG2). Reply to LS (R2-022422) on additional RAB configurations in 34.108. 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1
This document was presented by Joerg Schniedenham from Siemens.
Discussion:
Decision: The Liaison Statement was noted. Siemens will provide the "Change Request" on TR 25.993 for the Agenda point 6.17, in R2-023033.
6.1.2 TSG-RAN WG3
R2-023184 (R3-022557, to RAN WG2) Reply to LS (S2-023102) on proposed TR for the architectural aspects of early UE handling RAN WG3
This document was presented by Denis Fauconnier (Chairman).
Discussion:
Decision: The Liaison Statement was noted.
6.1.3 TSG-RAN WG4
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.1.4 TSG-SA and TSG-SA WGs
6.1.4.1 TSG-SA WG2
R2-022871 (S2-023102, to TSG-RAN WG2) LS on a proposed TR for the architectural aspects of early UE handling. TSG-SA WG2
This document was presented by Alan Law from Vodafone Group.
Discussion:
If this only impacts the activation of features, then there is no need to send the information over the Iu-r.
Decision: The LS was noted. We will wait for SA2 to provide the updated Technical Report.
6.1.4.4 TSG-SA WG4
R2-022867 (S4-020600, to TSG-RAN WG2) Reply to LS (S2-022635Rev1) on Maximum Rate Control and Guaranteed bit rate. TSG-SA WG4
This document was presented by Tania Godard from Nortel Networks.
Discussion:
There was a different anwer between SA2 and SA4 on the guaranteed/minimum bit rate. SA2 is asking which bit rate is to be assumed. There is also a question for RAN WG2.
Decision: We have this maximum rate, which can be used every 20 ms in the Rel-4 (in the user and control plane). This is an RNC implementation of not going below the lowest rate for AMR. The specification appears correct. Nortel (Tania Godard) will draft the reply LS in R2-023031.
R2-022868 (S4-020604, to TSG-RAN WG2) Reply to LS (R2-022423-020478) on Rate Adaptation of AMR Codec. TSG-SA WG4
This document was presented by Gert-Jan Lieshout from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Some doubts were expressed on this solution as the guaranteed bit rate is not signalled to the UE.
The CR needs to be revised.
Decision: Ericsson will revise the CRs and draft an LS (in R2-023030).
R2-023188 (S4-020720, to RAN WG2), Reply to LS (R2-023158) on Rate Adaptation of AMR Codec. SA WG4
This document was presented by Joakim Bergstrom from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Decision: The outgoing LS will be drafted by Hector Vayanos (Qualcomm) in R2-023253.
6.1.5 TSG-CN and TSG-CN WGs
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.1.6 TSG-T and TSG-T WGs
6.1.6.1 TSG-T WG1
R2-023028 (T1-020716, to TSG-RAN WG2). Reply to LS (R2-022685) on applicability of the RAB configuration used for RLC testing. TSG-T WG1
This Liaison statement was presented by Francesco Grilli from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
Decision: Someone needs to draft the CR.
After off-line discussions, Nortel drafted an associated discussion paper in R2-023065 (see agenda item 6.2.2).
R2-023032 (T1-020891, to TSG-RAN WG2). LS on uplink reference measurement channels. TSG-T WG1
This Liaison Statement was presented by Luis Barreto from Nokia.
Discussion:
R2-023029 is linked with this subject.
Decision: The LS was noted. See the discussions in tdoc R2-023029.
6.1.7 TSG-GERAN and TSG-GERAN WGs
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.2 General decisions
6.2.1 Early UE handling
R2-022957 Discussion on handling of early UEs Ericsson
This document was presented by Himke van der Velde from Ericsson. There are some size constraints in the RRC connection request message. There are more room in the neighbour cell measurement report message.
Discussion:
Question: Why are some information optional/conditional ? And why is the information included in both the RRC Connection request and UE capability ?
Answer: There may be a need to request the information on demand. And the RRC Connection request message is not sent on the 2G radio interface.
Comment: then, the procedures need to be written.
Comment: the information shall be optional, because a not faulty UEs shall not send it.
Comment: What is exactly converted ? The sentence could be read in two ways.
Answer: No fields are separately converted. This is treated as a 10 digit number.
Comment: No measurement on 2 cells can be reported by the UE with this CR. What are the consequences on the measurement reporting ? Does the RRC specification need to be updated ?
Question: Which report shall the UE send if the room allowed for the reports decrease ? Is it left to the UE implementation ?
Answer: This is already specified today.
Question: How do the Rel-4 and Rel-5 CRs look like ?
Answer: It would be useful to keep it similar for later releases.
Question: How-many cells can the UE report in the worse case, when this information is included ? This may affect the RRC connection.
Decision: An update will be provided, together as the shadow CRs. See the Change Requests in numbers R2-023090/R2-023091/R2-023091 (Agenda item 6.13).
R2-023022 Early UE handling Nokia
This document was presented by Gairn Kalla from Nokia. This proposal handles also the UEs that are already on the market.
Discussion:
Question: Where would the "RRC bits" be included ?
Answer: In the RRC Connection request.
Question: What is the difference with the earlier proposals ?
Answer: The bits are not associated to an explicit meaning.
Decision: The document was noted. See the CRs from Nokia in R2-022895, R2-022896 and R2-022897 (although they also have a more general purpose of general extension) (agenda point 6.13).
R2-023001 RRC hooks strategy Alcatel, Fujitsu, Motorola, NEC, Nortel, Orange, Siemens
This document was presented by Michael Roberts from NEC.
Discussion:
The work around should be described in the Technical Report.
The hooks can be overwritten by the bitmap with this solution.
Decision: The document was noted.
R2-023002 Proposed CR to 25.331 [R'99] on "Implementation Status Identifier" for early mobile handling Alcatel, Fujitsu, Motorola, NEC, Orange, Siemens
R2-023003 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on "Implementation Status Identifier" for early mobile handling Alcatel, Fujitsu, Motorola, NEC, Orange, Siemens
R2-023004 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on "Implementation Status Identifier" for early mobile handling Alcatel, Fujitsu, Motorola, NEC, Orange, Siemens
This document was presented by Patrick Fischer from Alcatel.
Discussion:
Question: Is not one container enough ? The extension mechanism has to be efficient in size, having a container in one container does not go in this direction. Also, what is the gain in doing this ?
Comment: We do not have 8 bits available in the Rel-4. For the Rel-5, we may even not have 7 bits (e.g. extension of the RSCP reporting).
General question: Do we make the CR with the "Nokia extension" for December, for the R'99 corrections ?
Answer: Yes.
Only for the R'99 ?
A Rel-4 onwards UE will set the bit to zero. The Rel-4 meaning could be different, or not.
Comment (on R2-023022): We need a change with an amount of data that we will not depends on CRs that will follow.
Decision: The CRs will be revised in order to be technically endorsed and presented at the plenary. See the two sets of CRs in R2-023123/R2-023124/R2-023125 and R2-023126/R2-023127/R2-023128.
There will be three different RAN WG2 CRs on the subject of "early UE handling", that will be technically endorsed in order to be presented at the next TSG-RAN Plenary.
R2-022845 Handling of Early Mobiles Hutchison 3G
This document was withdrawn as not available.
6.2.2 Other
R2-023233 Principles for handling compressed mode capabilities in RRC Motorola
This document was presented by Richard Burbidge from Motorola.
Discussion:
Is this Change Request backward compatible ?
Decision: A Liaison Statement will be sent to RAN4 (Cc RAN1). RAN4 will take approriate actions on the performances. The proposed Liaison Statement is in In R2-023249.
Mitsubishi has some proposed Change Requests on the subject, in R2-023185, R2-023186 and R2-023187 (the Change Requests were studied in agenda item 6.13 and revised into tdocs R2-023250, R2-023251 and R2-023252).
R2-023006 Discussion document on PRACH selection Qualcomm
This document was presented by Hector Vayanos from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
The coverpage (consequences if not approved) and the note need to be re-phrased.
Decision: The CRs in this document are revised in tdocs R2-023037, R2-023038, R2-023039. The CR numbers are 1708, 1709, 1710. The Change Requests will be seen again:
R2-023037 Proposed CR 1708 to 25.331 [R'99] on Corrections to PRACH selection Qualcomm
R2-023038 Proposed CR 1709 to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Corrections to PRACH selection Qualcomm
R2-023039 Proposed CR 1710 to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Corrections to PRACH selection Qualcomm
This document was presented by Hector Vayanos from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were agreed. However, they were then revised again after off-line comments into R2-023274, R2-023275 and R2-023276 (agreed versions).
R2-022970 Correction to the START formula in 33.102 Qualcomm
This document was presented by Francesco Grilli from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
The coverpage needs to be re-phrased.
The CR does not affect the RAN.
Consequences if not approved need to be re-phrased.
Decision: Francesco Grilli (Qualcomm) will draft a Liaison Statement to SA-WG3 in R2-023040. The proposed (and revised) CRs to 33.102 will be attached. See tdoc R2-023040.
R2-023065 Discussion on Applicability of the RAB configuration used for RLC testing. (linked with LS from T1 in R2-023038) Nortel Networks
This document was presented by Tania Godard from Nortel Networks.
Discussion:
This contains CRs on 34.123 and 34.108.
Decision: We will come-back on it on Friday.
R2-023214 Revised Discussion on Applicability of the RAB configuration used for RLC testing. (linked with LS from T1 in R2-023038) Nortel Networks
This document was presented by Tania Godard from Nortel Networks.
The Section 4 has been updated.
The 34.123 and 34.108 CRs are included.
Discussion:
The window size seems to change the test cases. Could this not be avoided ?
Decision:
The 2 proposals (changing or not the window size, the first case allowing to change the 15 bit, but the second avoiding to change the test cases) will be included. The proposals will be sent in a LS on the RAN1 reflector for RAN1 to confirm the L1 parameters. In R2-023248. Sent also to T, T1, Cc RAN.
6.3 Proposed changes on 25.301
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.4 Proposed changes on 25.302
R2-022987 Proposed CR to 25.302 [R'99] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
R2-022988 Proposed CR to 25.302 [Rel-4 shadow] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
R2-022989 Proposed CR to 25.302 [Rel-5 shadow] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
This document was presented by Christoph Herrmann from Philips.
Discussion:
Decision: CRs will be written in R2-023041, R2-023042, R2-023043. CR numbers in 132, 133 and 134. The CRs will be seen again. The RRC issue will be merged with the CR in R2-023119.
R2-023041 Proposed CR 132 to 25.302 [R'99] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
R2-023042 Proposed CR 133 to 25.302 [Rel-4 shadow] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
R2-023043 Proposed CR 134 to 25.302 [Rel-5 shadow] on the two realisations of an empty transport format to align Stage 2 and Stage 3 descriptions Philips
This document was presented by Christoph Herrmann from Philips.
Discussion:
Decision:The CRs were agreed.
6.5 Proposed changes on 25.303
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.6 Proposed changes on 25.304
R2-022790 Proposed CR to 25.304 [R'99] on Highest HCS priority Siemens
R2-022791 Proposed CR to 25.304 [Rel-4 shadow] on Highest HCS priority Siemens
R2-022792 Proposed CR to 25.304 [Rel-5 shadow] on Highest HCS priority Siemens
This document was presented by Thomas Stadler from Siemens.
Discussion:
Comment: What does the change exactly add ? A UE would have already interpreted 7 as higher than 0.
Comment: Still, a clarification is needed, as the opposite may be assumed. Also on the Iu, the priority works in the opposite way.
Decision: The CRs were agreed into the tdoc numbers R2-023044, R2-023045, R2-023046. CR numbers are 102, 103 and 104.
6.7 Proposed changes on 25.305
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.8 Proposed changes on 25.306
R2-023175 Proposed CR 052 on 25.306 [R'99] on UE capability for RLC window size LG Electronics
R2-023176 Proposed CR 053 on 25.306 [Rel-4 shadow] on UE capability for RLC window size LG Electronics
R2-023177 Proposed CR 054 on 25.306 [Rel-5 shadow] on UE capability for RLC window size LG Electronics
Those Change Requests have been triggered by the discussions on the 25.306 Rel-4 Change Request on RFC3095 (see R2-022917 in agenda item 8.8).
This document was presented by SoYoung Lee from LG Electronics.
Discussion:
The consequences if not approved are incomplete.
Decision: Agreed in R2-023245, R2-023246 and R2-023247.
6.9 Proposed changes on 25.321
R2-022962 Proposed CR to 25.321 [R'99] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
R2-022963 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-4 shadow] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
R2-022964 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-5 shadow] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
This document was presented by Hector Vayanos from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
What about the TFC selection for TDD ?
Concerns with the parenthesis (redundant information).
Decision: CRs will be written in R2-023047, R2-023048 and R2-023049. The CR numbers are 140, 141 and 142. We will see them again.
R2-023047 Proposed CR 140 to 25.321 [R'99] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
R2-023048 Proposed CR 141 to 25.321 [Rel-4 shadow] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
R2-023049 Proposed CR 142 to 25.321 [Rel-5 shadow] on TFC selection for RACH transmissions Qualcomm
This document was presented by Hector Vayanos from Qualcomm.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were agreed (with revisions) into R2-023270, R2-023271, R2-023272.
R2-022830 Proposed CR to 25.321 [R'99] on RB id in ciphering in MAC Ericsson
R2-022831 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-4 shadow] on RB id in ciphering in MAC Ericsson
R2-022832 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-5 shadow] on RB id in ciphering in MAC Ericsson
This document was presented by Anders Berggren from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Decision: Bearers are defined by radio bearer identifiers, which is the RB identity minus 1. The CRs were agreed into tdocs R2-023050, R2-023051, R2-023052. CR numbers are 143, 144 and 145.
R2-022939 Proposed CR to 25.321 [R'99] on correction to TFC selection for TDD IPWireless
R2-022940 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-4 shadow] on correction to TFC selection for TDD IPWireless
R2-022941 Proposed CR to 25.321 [Rel-5 shadow] on correction to TFC selection for TDD IPWireless
This document was presented by Tim Speight from IPWireless.
Discussion:
Decision: CRs agreed in R2-023053, R2-023054 and R2-023055. CRs in 146, 147 and 148.
6.10 Proposed changes on 25.322
R2-022825 Withdrawn CR to 25.322 [R'99] on STATUS PDUs being exchanged during a RESET Procedure Nortel Networks
R2-022879 Withdrawn CR to 25.322 [Rel-4 shadow] on STATUS PDUs being exchanged during a RESET Procedure Nortel Networks
R2-022880 Withdrawn CR to 25.322 [Rel-5 shadow] on STATUS PDUs being exchanged during a RESET Procedure Nortel Networks
This document was withdrawn before presentation.
R2-022827 Proposed CR to 25.322 [R'99] on RB id in ciphering in RLC Ericsson
R2-022828 Proposed CR to 25.322 [Rel-4] on RB id in ciphering in RLC Ericsson
R2-022829 Proposed CR to 25.322 [Rel-5] on RB id in ciphering in RLC Ericsson
This document was presented by Anders Berggren from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Decision: Agreed in R2-023056, 023057 and 023058. CRs in 210, 211 and 212.
6.11 Proposed changes on 25.323
There was no input under this agenda item.
6.12 Proposed changes on 25.324
R2-022905 Proposed CR to 25.324 [R'99] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-022906 Proposed CR to 25.324 [Rel-4 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-022907 Proposed CR to 25.324 [Rel-5 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
This document was presented by Juha Mikola from Nokia.
Discussion:
Decision: After discussions, it was decided to come-back later on those CRs.
The CRs were then revised into R2-023161, R2-023162 and R2-023163. CR numbers in 011, 012 and 013.
R2-023161 Proposed CR 011 to 25.324 [R'99] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-023162 Proposed CR 012 to 25.324 [Rel-4 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-023163 Proposed CR 013 to 25.324 [Rel-5 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
The CRs were revised before presentation into R2-023221, R2-023222, R2-023223.
R2-023221 Proposed CR 011Rev1 to 25.324 [R'99] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-023222 Proposed CR 012Rev1 to 25.324 [Rel-4 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
R2-023223 Proposed CR 013Rev1 to 25.324 [Rel-5 shadow] on Bit order in BMC messages Nokia
This document was presented by Juha Mikola from Nokia.
Discussion:
Decision: The Change Requests were agreed.
6.13 Proposed changes on 25.331
R2-022784 Proposed CR 1694 Rev2 to 25.331 [R'99] on Measurement related corrections Siemens and Ericsson
R2-022785 Proposed CR 1695 Rev2 to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Measurement related corrections Siemens and Ericsson
R2-022786 Proposed CR 1696 Rev1 to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Measurement related corrections Siemens and Ericsson
This document was presented by Agnes Revel from Siemens.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were agreed in R2-023059, R2-023060 and R2-023061 (The IE name needs to be changed).
R2-022787 Proposed CR to 25.331 [R'99] on TDD Downlink Path Loss for interfrequency measurement Siemens
R2-022788 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on TDD Downlink Path Loss for interfrequency measurement Siemens
R2-022789 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on TDD Downlink Path Loss for interfrequency measurement Siemens
This document was presented by Agnes Revel from Siemens.
Discussion: An update to show the change bars is needed.
Decision: Agreed in R2-023062, R2-023063, R2-023064. CR numbers are 1711, 1712 and 1713.
R2-022813 Proposed CR to 25.331 [R'99] on Correction on reporting of quality measurement as additional measurement Nortel Networks
R2-022814 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Correction on reporting of quality measurement as additional measurement Nortel Networks
R2-022815 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Correction on reporting of quality measurement as additional measurement Nortel Networks
This document was presented by Claudiu Mihailescu from Nortel Networks.
Discussion:
We seem to revisit an earlier decision here.
What is the exact problem ?
A more obvious correction would be for RAN4 to specify the measurement period.
Decision: The CRs were not agreed.
R2-022816 Proposed CR to 25.331 [R'99] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
R2-022817 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
R2-022818 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
This document was presented by Claudiu Mihailescu from Nortel Networks.
Discussion:
The RAN3 specification will point to RRC.
Is the value of "33" decimal or hexadecimal ?
Has the extension container been considered ?
Decision:
"33" will be specified as hexadecimal. The octet order will be added. We will see an update. CRs in R2-023066, R2-023067 and R2-023068. CR numbers in 1714, 1715 and 1716.
R2-023066 Proposed CR 1714 to 25.331 [R'99] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
R2-023067 Proposed CR 1715 to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
R2-023068 Proposed CR 1716 to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Correction on coding of GSM Classmark 2 and 3 Nortel Networks
This document was presented by Claudiu Mihailescu from Nortel Networks.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were agreed (as they are).
R2-022955 Discussion of Handling of RB mapping information at state transitions Ericsson
This document was presented by Gert-Jan from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were revised into R2-023119, R2-023120 and R2-023121. CR numbers in 1755, 1756 and 1757:
R2-023119 Proposed CR 1755 to 25.331 [R'99] on Handling of RB mapping Ericsson
R2-023120 Proposed CR 1756 to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on Handling of RB mapping Ericsson
R2-023121 Proposed CR 1757 to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on Handling of RB mapping Ericsson
Presented by Gert-Jan Lieshout from Ericsson.
Discussion:
Decision: The CRs were agreed with further changes in R2-023255, R2-023256 and R2-023257.
R2-023193 Proposed CR to 25.331 [R'99] on ambiguous setting of integrity activation times Ericsson
R2-023194 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-4 shadow] on ambiguous setting of integrity activation times Ericsson
R2-023195 Proposed CR to 25.331 [Rel-5 shadow] on ambiguous setting of integrity activation times Ericsson
This document was presented by Anders Berggren from Ericsson.
Document R2-023232 from Motorola was seen in conjunction:
R2-023232 Discussion of UE/UTRAN Actions on HFN rollover in Specific Instances Motorola
This document was presented by Tania Godard from Nortel Networks.
Decision on those two documents: An email discussion (triggered by Anders Berggren from Ericsson) will be held to decide if corrections are needed or not. The discussion will finish at the end of the week after the meeting. |
