3GPP TSG-T2 #7 / ETSI SMG4
Ystad, SWEDEN, 22-26 November 1999	TSGT2#7(99) 1008	

Agenda Item:	

Source:	Samsung Electronics Research Institute

Title:	Future of UE capabilities work

Document for:	Discussion and decision

___________________________________________________________________________

Introduction
TR 21.904 “Terminal Capability Requirements”, was approved at the last TSG T plenary meeting (#5) and raised to version 1.0.0. There was some discussion at that time over whether the document was sufficiently complete/stable (i.e. 50%) to become version 1.0.0, but the meeting agreed that it was appropriate, in order that the document could officially be made available to other working groups for information. The current intention is to raise TR 21.904 to version 3.0.0 at the December TSG T plenary meeting, but it is extremely unlikely that the document could be 90% complete/stable at that time. It is therefore necessary to discuss and decide what to do with the document in December, and how best to complete the work item in the future. 
Background
SWG6 of 3GPP TSG T WG2 has been working to produce a report on UE Capability requirements since March 1999. In order to facilitate the identification of required capabilities, the group decided to split the UE functionality into that which is required for the UE to exist in the network without the ability to support any services, and that which is required to support standardised and non-standardised service capabilities as agreed in 3GPP.

Liaison officers were appointed between SWG6 and other 3GPP working groups to help identify the implementation capabilities in each technical domain, that are required to support both baseline and service functionalities. A number of liaison statement have since been exchanged between T2 and other working groups, and some details of required implementation capabilities have been included in the TCR report. However, there has been some difficulty in obtaining the required information from a number of working groups, and some misunderstanding as to the intentions of the report, and of T2 in preparing it. There now appears to be greater understanding among other 3GPP working groups of the information to be included in the TCR report, and the Baseline Implementation Capabilities information is very nearly complete. There is however, little time remaining before the next TSG T plenary meeting, in which to identify and incorporate outstanding details of Service Implementation Capabilities. What’s more, TSG RAN has now decided to produce its own UE Radio Bearer Capabilities report (TR 25.926) which will have a significant impact on the future contents of TR 21.904, and that report will itself not be completed until after December 1999.
Discussion
Given the problems experienced in obtaining the required information on baseline and service implementation capabilities, and the relative incompleteness of the TCR report, SWG6 needs to decide how to handle the TCR report at the next TSG T plenary meeting.

A number  options exist, examples of which follow:
1.	T2 works towards raising the report to version 3.0.0 in December, but the scope of the TCR report is revised, so that only baseline implementation capabilities and those required to support speech, are included in the R’99 version of the report. 
2.	The work programme is revised and the planned date for raising the TCR report to version 3.0.0. is put back to June 2000. 
3.	The work item is split into two deliverables, one for the Baseline Capabilities and one for the Service Capabilities, with the UE Baseline Capabilities report being raised to version 3.0.0 in December 1999, and the UE Service Capabilities report being planned for completion in June 2000.
Option 1 would be in line with T1’s requirements, as it only plans to produce tests for those aspects of a UE’s performance in R’99. However, it may be very difficult for T2 to obtain agreed details of the L23 SICs to support speech in time for inclusion in the TCR report prior the TSG T plenary meeting in December, as the work in R2 on UE Capabilities is now very much focussed on RAN’s own UE Radio Bearer Capabilities report TR 25.926. It could perhaps be argued that the report minus the L23 speech SICs, was 90% complete, but the scope of the R’99 report would be very different of that for R2000, which could be misleading to those reading the document.
Option 2 would give T2 and other working groups more time to identify the SICs required to support speech and other standardised/non-standardised UE Service Capabilities. It would mean that there was no TCR report available within the R’99 timescale, but may still enable the completion of the report by June 2000, in for T1’s timescale of completing conformance tests by July 2000. There remains however, a danger that due to the large number of service capabilities, it will still not be possible to have completed 90% of the report by that date.
Option 3 would require a more significant change to the SWG6 work plan due to the creation of two separate UE capability reports. However, it would enable a significant part of the work item on Terminal Capabilities to be completed within the R’99 timescale, and provide T1 with a reasonably stable document on which to base terminal conformance test requirements proforma for the baseline functionality. It would also enable SWG6 to start work in the new year with a clear task to identify and produce a report on, UE Service Capabilities.
Conclusion
The options presented and briefly discussed above are not intended to be exhaustive, only to give an example of those available to SWG6 and T2 when deciding how to progress the work on UE Capabilities. One thing is however certain, and that is that it will not be possible to complete the TCR report as currently envisaged, within the originally planned timescale. Some change is  therefore required. 

Option 1 above would require a great deal of work to be done between now and the December T plenary meeting. Even if it is possible to get the required information from R2 on the SICs to support speech, the finalised TCR report would have to be approved in T2 via email. That would not appear to be practical. Option 2 requires the least change to the existing work programme, and gives more time to identify SICs for a range of different services. It is however possible that due to the large number of Service Capabilities, the TCR report would still not be completed by June 2000. If that was the case, then much of the work that has already been completed in identifying BICs may be wasted, as the longer it takes to complete an agreed TCR report, the less value it will have when completed. Option 3 requires the greatest change to the work programme of the group, but would enable T2 to agree a TCR report for the baseline functionality at this meeting, and for approval as version 3.0.0 in December 1999. It would also provide a clear indication of the capabilities required by all 3G UEs and give T1 a stable document on which to base its Conformance test requirements proforma.
 
SWG6 should carefully consider the above options, not least the impact of securing that which has already been agreed i.e. the Baseline Implementation Capabilities and recommending to T2 the creation of a UE BCR report, which could be published immediately. T2 SWG6 would then have 6 months to concentrate on and produce a R’99 UE SCR report for approval in June 2000.