Coex Ad Hoc January London Agenda and Report October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Coex Ad Hoc January London Agenda and Report Date: 2007-01-15 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@ok-brit.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>. Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Abstract Coex Ad Hoc in January London agenda and report regarding comment resolution of LB84 (802.11n), including straw polls and motions Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Overview - Wed Jan 10th 174 open CIDs in 06/724r45 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Overview - Wed Jan 10th 174 open CIDs in 06/724r45 40/20 MHz in 2.4 GHz 61 CIDs CCA sensing 89 CIDs DFS 14 CIDs E-CSA 8 CIDs ER/EMR 2 CIDs Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Submissions Related to Comment Resolution October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Submissions Related to Comment Resolution 11-07-1951-00-000n-misc-coex-comments (Eldad) – approved; reviewed on Jan 11th 11-06-1841-02-000n-removing-40-mhz-from-24-ghz (Jim, wants to go last), 40/20 11-06-1901-03 (Assaf), CCA – reviewed on Jan 10th 06-1901r04 – update to split CCA into 20 and 40MHz sections; reviewed on Jan 11th 11-06-1896-01 (Bjorn), DFS – reviewed on Jan 10th 06-1896r02 – approved; reviewed on Jan 11th 11-07-1940-03 (Matt), 40/20 – reviewed on Jan 11th 11-07-1940-04 – new changes reviewed on Jan 12th 11-07-1941-02 (Peter, wants to go last), 40/20 - withdrawn 11-07-0043-00-some-coex-resolutions (Srini) – reviewed on Jan 11th Remember to update cover template with Stuart’s new email address Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Wed Jan 10th Straw Polls -CCA October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Wed Jan 10th Straw Polls -CCA In a 40/20 BSS, when a STA is sensing CCA and detects energy in the final DIFS of the backoff (in the primary or secondary), it will not transmit a 20MHz transmission with a 40MHz mask Yes: 30 No: 7 Abstain: 3 Should we change text to deal with potential interference in the secondary channel? Yes:12 No: 19 Abstain: 6 In 1901, 3rd paragraph, should we change “either transmit no PPDU or transmit a 20 MHz PPDU” to “shall not transmit a PPDU” Yes: No: Abstain Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Wed Jan 10th Straw Polls -CCA October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Wed Jan 10th Straw Polls -CCA Does 21.3.21.5 adequately cover a 20MHz only STA? Yes: 5 No: 14 Abstain: 13 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Wed Jan 10th Notes CID 3614 will be resolved by the combination of 06/1896 and 06/1901, will add to spreadsheet when these two documents are motioned CID 1521 move from 06/1896 to 06/1901 EMR for CID 7365 resolved ER for CID 9892 resolved Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Thurs Jan 11th Straw Polls – 07/1940r3 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Thurs Jan 11th Straw Polls – 07/1940r3 Do you support the mechanisms presented in 07/0049r0 and proposed in 07/1940r3, excluding primary and secondary overlap cases? Yes: 34 No: 2 Abstain: 7 Would the mechanisms presented in 07/0049r0 and proposed in 07/1940r3 represent an acceptable alternative to banning 40MHz in 2.4GHz? Yes: 26 No: 8 Abstain:10 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Thurs Jan 11th Notes 06/1901r4 06/1896r2 is approved unanimously October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Thurs Jan 11th Notes 06/1901r4 Found error in Table n49—PPDU format as a function of CH_BANDWIDTH(Ed: CID 3615) and CH_OFFSET parameters; definition of 20MHz upper and lower does not match Table n50. Assaf will propose correction in new version of 06/1901 06/1896r2 is approved unanimously 11-07-0043-00-some-coex-resolutions CID 2924 is removed, and will be pending resolution to GF protection discussions in the MAC Ad Hoc CID 2924 is in MAC spreadsheet, not Coex 11-07-1951-00-000n-misc-coex-comments is approved unanimously Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Fri Jan 12th Notes 11-07-0043-01-some-coex-resolutions is approved unanimously CID 52, 7898 resolved CCA sensing Restrictions to 20MHz initiation of transmission when using the 40MHz mask Must sense secondary channel Don’t transmit if busy at PIFS 07/1940 latest revisions in rev4 Exclusion of primary from detection of legacy Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls – CCA sensing October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls – CCA sensing Do you support restrictions to 20MHz initiation of transmission when using the 40MHz mask Must sense secondary channel Don’t transmit if busy at PIFS Yes: 27 No: 3 Abstain: 7 Would you support 06/1901r5 with the above restrictions? Yes: 25 No: 2 Abstain:14 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 Do you support mandatory scanning if STA advertising capability of operating in 20/40? Yes: 16 No: 8 Abstain: 17 Do you support only optional scanning if STA advertising capability of operating in 20/40 and is associated as power save? Yes: 24 No: 10 Abstain: 7 Do you support mandatory scanning by the AP advertising capability of operating in 20/40? Yes: 4 No: 32 Abstain: 8 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 Would you support the mechanism proposed in 07/1940 modified to allow only optional scanning if STA advertising capability of operating in 20/40 and while in power save mode? Yes: 20 No: 4 Abstain: 12 Would you support the mechanisms proposed in 07/1940 if the scanning requirement modified to include fewer than the 7 channels closest and centered on the secondary channel? Yes: 28 No: 7 Abstain: 6 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Fri Jan 12th Straw Polls -07/1940 Would the mechanisms proposed in 07/1940r4 and agreed upon modifications represent an acceptable alternative to banning 40MHz in 2.4GHz? Power save scanning optional No scanning around primary Yes: 22 No: 7 Abstain: 13 Should 40MHz operation in 2.4GHz be banned? Yes: 13 No: 10 Abstain: 16 Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

New Overview as of Monday Jan 15th October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 New Overview as of Monday Jan 15th 26 CIDs (including DFS) resolved in pre-meeting 2 ER/EMR 12 DFS (06/1896) 12 Miscellaneous (07/0043, 07/1951) 148 open CIDs in 06/724r49 Major topics to resolve: 40/20 MHz in 2.4 GHz CCA sensing E-CSA Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Submissions Related to Comment Resolution October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Submissions Related to Comment Resolution Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Monday Jan 15th Notes January 2007 October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Monday Jan 15th Notes Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

Monday Jan 15th Straw Polls October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Monday Jan 15th Straw Polls Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)

October 2006 doc.: IEEE 802.11-06/1560r1 January 2007 Pending Motions Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labeled “Motion Tab 9” in document 11-06/0724r50. Based on resolutions for DFS and miscellaneous CIDs from London pre-meeting Resolves 26 comments with As, Cs, and Rs Passed by unanimous consent Eldad Perahia (Intel) Matthew Fischer (Broadcom)