TGn Editor’s Report – July 2006 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 July 2006 TGn Editor’s Report – July 2006 Date: 2006-07-19 Authors: Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.11. 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 grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.11. Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures <http:// ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair <stuart.kerry@philips.com> as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE 802.11 Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at <patcom@ieee.org>. Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation John Doe, Some Company

Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 July 2006 Abstract This presentation contains an opening report from the TGn editor intended to be presented in the opening session of TGn, plus associated editorial motions intended to be used later in the agenda. Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation John Doe, Some Company

July 2006 Acknowledgments The following people provided editorial assistance during the last 2 months: Editing and comment resolution: Amit Bansal, Ariton Xhafa, Bjorn Bjerke, John Ketchum, Krishna Pillai, Eldad Perahia, Sanjiv Nanda, Srinivas Kandala, Vinko Erceg FrameMaker conversion: Gary Williams (Qualcomm) Editorial and comment review: George Vlantis, John Ketchum, Assaf Kasher, Krishna Pillai, Yuichi Morioka, Eldad Perahia, Sanjiv Nanda, Tomoko Adachi, Bill Marshall, Solomon Trainin Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Slide from May 2006 Editor’s closing report Editorial Process July 2006 Slide from May 2006 Editor’s closing report Editorial Process Volunteers will work with sections of the working draft and matching sections of comments to prepare tentative resolution The goal is to complete this for the July TGn session The editor will bring: A change-bar D1.01 showing editorial changes A comment-resolution spreadsheet showing tentative resolutions A motion in TGn to accept the changes and approve D1.01 as the embodiment of those changes There will be some un-handled HE editorials requiring discussion in TGn (e.g. naming, document structure) Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Recent Editorial Activities July 2006 Recent Editorial Activities Split the draft (D1.00 word version) and matching editorial comments into 10 packets of work and assigned these to volunteer “heavy lifters” to resolve and edit. (2 weeks) Reassembled the draft and resolved “deferred” editorials (1 week) Conversion to FrameMaker Initial import (1 week) Manual fixing of headings, cross-references, styles (2 weeks) Editorial review. Split the comments between 12 volunteers who checked that resolutions had been implemented. They also checked a range of pages in the draft to ensure that there were no technical changes. (1 week) D 1.01 publication (2 versions) D 1.01 review comments (about 50 defects reported so far) Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Status of the Draft Conversion to FrameMaker complete July 2006 Status of the Draft Conversion to FrameMaker complete Conditional text used to show insertions and deletions since D1.00 Only a single FrameMaker source, but multiple ways of creating the .pdf file based on conditional text settings Two version of the document are published: D1.01 showing insertions in blue and unchanged text in black D1.01 showing insertions in blue, deletions in red strikeout and unchanged text in black Why two versions? The extent of the changes, together with the automated change tracking process (a Word compare followed by a Frame import of the file with tracked changes) resulted in some bizarre (and confusing) decisions regarding what matches up with what. This confusion is apparent only in the “insertions and deletions” version. The “insertions” version suffers from no artefacts resulting from the change tracking. Some defects need to be fixed before voting on a D1.02 can take place Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Status of the Editorial Comments (not including exact duplicates) July 2006 Status of the Editorial Comments (not including exact duplicates) Resolution Status % A 2376 76.2% C 427 13.7% R 317 10.2% Grand Total 3120 100.0% Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Hard Editorials These are comments requiring submission and/or discussion in the technical ad-hocs These comments are owned by the technical ad-hocs and will be progressed along with other technical comments Some comments need input from TGn – there are some straw polls to come in this session to resolve these Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Editorial activities this Session July 2006 Editorial activities this Session In TGn Session (<1hr) Report on Status (This report) Brief Review of Resolutions Brief Review of Draft In Editorial Ad-hoc (2 hours) More detailed review of the comments More detailed review of the draft Q & A on the resolutions and draft changes Collate any additional defects defects Between sessions Update Draft 1.01 to Draft 1.02 TGn chair publishes draft In TGn Session Motion to accept editorial resolution (15 minutes) Motion to accept Draft 1.02 as an editorial revision (15 minutes) Straw Polls on “Hard Editorials” 6 straw poll * 5 minutes (30 minutes) Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Editorial Goals for September July 2006 Editorial Goals for September Incorporate all changes approved by TGn during the July session in a draft to be released before September Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Editorial Guidance to Submission Authors July 2006 Editorial Guidance to Submission Authors Authors please read and use 11-06-0967-00-000n-tgn-lb84-submission-template-and-guide.doc Quick review of document here (5 minutes) Guidance only – no normative requirements Goal is to achieve both of the following Clear presentation of the results of any changes to aid TGn voters Smallest possible set of changes presented as editing instructions to the TGn editor using the usual change, insert, delete commands to minimise the likelihood of conflicting changes Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Ad-hocs Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Status comment database technical ad-hocs July 2006 Status comment database technical ad-hocs Unique Technical comments status summary + detail Last Updated By A C R L W D T Blank Total Done % Done beam 65 35 72 1 208 9 390 173 44.3 ca 13 4 7 25 24 96 coex 52 32 44 2 135 259 524 130 24.8 frame 61 54 53 33 282 484 168 34.7 general 131 150 17 331 305 92.1 mac 103 51 56 3 155 184 552 213 38.5 phy 62 58 85 123 338 670 209 31.1 psmp 68 29 43 16 224 161 71.8 Totals 555 442 367 12 714 5 1098 3200 1383 43.2 Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Review of Resolutions Brief walkthrough of contents of editorial spreadsheet Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Review of Draft Brief walkthrough of unapproved D1.01 and explanation why there are two versions published Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Review agenda for remaining editorial activities shown in following slides Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Q & A Session – Editorial Ad-hoc July 2006 Q & A Session – Editorial Ad-hoc Q & A session on specific comments or changes to draft Identification of additional defects in D1.01 Look at change marks in D1.01 and compare with D1.00 text ~ 50 defects already reported Review and update editorial straw polls to be asked in TGn later Solicit additional volunteer helpers to review revisions of the draft prior to publication Solicit additional volunteer helpers to help edit resolutions (needs FrameMaker v7 installed) Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 Editorial Motions Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Motion to accept editorial resolutions July 2006 Motion to accept editorial resolutions Move to accept the LB84 comment resolutions shown in document 11-06-0706r9 on the “Motion 1” tab Moved/Seconded: Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Motion to accept P802.11n TGn Draft 1.02 as an editorial revision July 2006 Motion to accept P802.11n TGn Draft 1.02 as an editorial revision Move to accept document 11-06-1043-00-000n-proposed draft (1.02).pdf   located in http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/private/ Draft_Standards/11n/index.html as Draft P802.11n D1.02. Moved/seconded: Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Motion to request a Category Code for HT - background July 2006 Motion to request a Category Code for HT - background We approved a motion to the ANA to supply information element codes for the HT Information Elements in May 2006 This resolves a number of comments in LB84 We didn’t complete the job – the HT Category code is required for all HT Management Action frames. This will resolve additional LB84 Comments Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Motion to request a Category Code for HT July 2006 Motion to request a Category Code for HT Move to request the 802.11 Assigned Numbers Authority (ANA) to assign to 802.11 TGn a Category Code for “HT (High Throughput)” Moved / Seconded: Yes No Abstain Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Editorial Straw Polls (intro) July 2006 Editorial Straw Polls (intro) Some comment resolutions have significant impact or scope Frame formats Naming I don’t want to change something because of a handful of comments only to generate more objections to the new name – i.e. I need to discover a TGn consensus Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

Editorial Straw Polls (ESP) July 2006 Editorial Straw Polls (ESP) CIDS Description 1752 Naming: control channel -> primary channel 2911 Naming: is "High Throughput" the right name for clause 21? 3992 Naming: we have transmitter/receiver, requester/responder, beamformer/beamformee. Are they all necessary? 4797, 7698, 11955, 11956 Naming. We dropped the "legacy" term, but we still have L-STF etc... Should this be NHT-STF? 7700 Naming: should we replace HT STA with something like NSTA? Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

ESP CID 1752 Naming: control channel -> primary channel Result: July 2006 ESP CID 1752 Naming: control channel -> primary channel And also extension channel -> secondary channel Result: Yes 40 No 5 Don’t care 26 Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 ESP CID 2911 Naming: is "High Throughput" the right name for clause 21, and by implication, all HT features? Issue, HT used as an adjective – e.g. HT pure mode, HT greenfield mode. We need a term that can act as an adjective and as a noun. Straw poll keep HT name?: Yes 48 No 27 Abstain 16 If no, then what do you want? MSTA (MIMO STA) MIMO OFDM PHY NSTA (TGn STA) Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 ESP4 CID 3992 Naming: we have transmitter/receiver, requester/responder, beamformer/beamformee. Are they all necessary? Straw poll: do we need to remove one of the above terms? Yes No Abstain Leave it to the editor If so, which one, and what replaces it? Ed: need to provide count of terms and re-poll later in week Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 ESP CID 7700 Naming: should we replace HT STA with something like NSTA? Straw poll: replace HT STA with NSTA? Yes No Abstain Ed: based on previous resolution, Reject this. Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

July 2006 ESP5 CID 4797, 7698, 11955, 11956 Naming. We dropped the "legacy" term, but we still have L-STF etc... Should this be NHT-STF? Straw poll: replace L-STF with NHT-STF? Yes No Abstain Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

References TGn Pre-TG-approval Drafts: July 2006 References TGn Pre-TG-approval Drafts: 11-06-1043-00-000n-proposed draft (1.02).pdf 11-06-1061-00-000n-TGn Draft revision with additions.pdf 11-06-1060-00-000n-TGn Draft revision with additions and deletions.pdf Editorial Comment Resolution spreadsheet: 11-06-0706/r9 Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation