September 2004 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TGn to WG15 Liaison Report] Date Submitted: [16 September 2004] Source: [James D. Allen] Company [Appairent Technologies] Address [Add address Street, City, PC, Province/State, Country] Voice:[Add telephone number], FAX: [Add FAX number], E-Mail:[Add e-mail address] Re: [Excerpted from TGn Chair’s closing report, document 11-04-1xxx-00-000n] Abstract: [Summary of September 2004 Berlin meeting status] Purpose: [Inform the WG] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

Partially From Document 11-04-1030-02-000n September 2004 These notes courtesy of Bruce Kraemer, Chair TGn with my editorial comments Partially From Document 11-04-1030-02-000n James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

September Summary Good news 32 presentations completed Because the presentations did not fill every available meeting minute there was adequate time to caucus and, at least tentatively, explore possible mergers which would result in new completes or revised completes. Bad News Complete presentations did not have adequate time to present or answer audience questions. Not enough time to conduct panel discussion or additional selection steps. Not known how many completes will exist in November James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

September 2004 James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

November Agenda Challenge September 2004 November Agenda Challenge Panel Discussion Possible inclusion of one or more additional complete proposal Extended presentation and Q&A time for completes Additional technical presentations anticipated Need to refresh audience memory James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

You Are here Selection Process 665r9 September 2004 Mergers may take place. Step 11 The TG may Step 11 decide time Mergers may required for Step 13 The remaining take place. Step 7 Initial 60 Minutes consideration of proposals may undergo technical The TG may presentation for all new mergers Step 8 proposals. changes without decide time Panel discussion. requiring a required for consideration of Step 16 merge. new mergers Step 9 Elimination vote. Recess to allow Eliminate proposal Any new merger granted at with least support. mergers? Y option of TG. Presentation of merged proposals. N Y Any Mergers Presentation of all take place? Y remaining proposals Discard un- Step 10 merged partial proposals. Step 13 N The remaining proposals may Final 5 minute undergo technical More than 1 Panel Discussion Y at option of the Step 12 statement. changes without proposal left? 25% low-bar requiring a chair Elimination vote merge. N 60 minute Step 15 Step presentation of 17 More than 1 Roll-call Statements from Step 14 remaining N proposals proposal left? confirmation vote no voters of why they voted no. including Q & A N Step 20 Editor prepares Step 19 Draft 1.0. Vote that Adopt proposal as it is technically initial technical Y 75% for ? Response by consistent with specification proposers. technical spec. N Y 75% for ? 75% for ? Roll-call confirmation vote Y Step 11 Step 18 Forward Draft 1.0 Step 21 to WG for Letter Mergers may Ballot take place. N Bring back last The TG may three proposals decide time required for The remaining Step 13 consideration of proposals may new mergers undergo technical Drawing by Adrian Stephens Procedure End changes without September 16, 2003 requiring a merge. James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

Selection Process 665r9 A September 2004 Step 11 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Mergers may take place. The TG may decide time required for consideration of new mergers. Initial 60 minutes presentation for all proposals. Panel discussion. Step 11 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Any new mergers? Recess to allow merger granted at option of TG. Presentation of merged proposals. By Nov 4th Y N Discard unmerged partial proposals. Note this Step 10 Step 13 Final 5 minute statement. 25% low-bar Elimination vote. The remaining proposals may undergo technical changes without requiring a merge. Step 12 60 minute presentation of remaining proposals.. James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies

Partial proposals are need to merge to be voted on. September 2004 My Comments: Interesting points: Well run Partial proposals are need to merge to be voted on. 802.15.3 was presented by Allen as an independent proposal Many techniques included data aggregation Many techniques included increasing band to 40 MHz. Working with .11, .15 and .19 leadership to make sure .15 has some say as to how channels are bonded and how coexistence is optimized – more later. Heard that up to 680 Mbps was proposed James D. Allen, Appairent Technologies