IEEE 802.11 TGaf DRAFT Ad Hoc Meeting Plan and Agenda April 2009 doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/xxxxr0 March 2011 IEEE 802.11 TGaf DRAFT Ad Hoc Meeting Plan and Agenda Date: 2011-05-04 Authors: Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

April 2009 doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/xxxxr0 March 2011 Abstract This presentation is the agenda and meeting plan for the ad hoc meeting of IEEE 802.11 TGaf taking place May 4 - 6, 2011 in San Jose. Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Plan for the Week Review the list of contributions March 2011 Plan for the Week Review the list of contributions Review the comment spreadsheet 11-11/277r11 Comment resolution General MAC PHY Plan for Palm Springs meeting Task Group Officers Chair: Rich Kennedy (Research In Motion) Vice-chair: Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) Recording Secretary: Zhou Lan (NICT) Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Wednesday May 4th Agenda March 2011 Wednesday May 4th Agenda Meeting call to order Administrative items including IEEE IP statement Modify and approve the agenda Review the list of contributions Review status of 11-11/277r11 comment resolution spreadsheet Begin the resolution process with General comments Recess Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform March 2011 All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants: “Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents “Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims “Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents) The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2 Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged No duty to perform a patent search Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Patent Related Links March 2011 All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development. Patent Policy is stated in these sources: IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6 IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3 Material about the patent policy is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings March 2011 All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. Technical considerations remain primary focus Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets. Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation. Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object. --------------------------------------------------------------- See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details. Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Call for Potentially Essential Patents March 2011 If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance: Either speak up now or Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or Cause an LOA to be submitted Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Other Documents and WebPages to Review March 2011 Other Documents and WebPages to Review Please review the documents at the following links: -  IEEE Patent Policy - http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt -  Patent FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/faq.pdf -  LoA Form - http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/loa.pdf -  Affiliation FAQ -http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html -  Anti-Trust FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf -  Ethics - http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs/about/CoE_poster.pdf -  IEEE 802.11 Working Group P&P -     https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/public-file/07/11-07-0360-04-0000-802-11-policies-and-procedures.doc New 802 WG P&P: https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/09/ec-09-0007-02-00EC-draft-lmsc-wg-p-p.pdf New 802 LMSC P&P:https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/09/ec-09-0005-02-00EC-draft-revised-lmsc-p-p-for-wg-p-p-ballot.pdf New 802 LMSC OM: https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/09/ec-09-0006-02-00EC-draft-revision-of-the-lmsc-om-for-wg-p-p.pdf Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Task Group Chair’s Functions March 2011 Task Group Chair’s Functions [From Policies and Procedures of IEEE Project 802.11™, subclause 3.7.3] The TG Chair may decide non-technical issues or may put them to a vote of the TG. The TG participants and the Chair decide technical issues by vote. The TG Chair decides what is non-technical and what is technical. The TG Chair is responsible for presiding over TG sessions. The TG Chair shall operate the TG in an unbiased fashion. To maintain impartiality, the TG Chair shall refrain from taking sides in debate on technical motions. It is the responsibility of the TG Chair to lead the TG in producing a quality draft standard in a timely fashion as specified by the specific PAR Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Task Group Chair's Authority March 2011 Task Group Chair's Authority [From Policies and Procedures of IEEE Project 802.11™, subclause 3.7.4] To carry out the responsibilities cited in subclause 3.7.3*, the TG Chair has authority to: Decide which issues are technical and which are non-technical. Assign and unassign subtasks and task leaders or executors, e.g. secretary, subgroup leader, etc. Speak for the TG to the WG. Determine if an organization or consortium is dominating the TG, and, if so, raise the issue to the WG Chair. Be representative of the TG during coordination and interaction with IEEE® staff. * See slide 11 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

March 2011 Introduction WELCOME to the May 2011 ad hoc meeting of IEEE 802.11 TGaf! LB171 started on 1/24/11 and ran for 30 days, ending ar 23:59:59 EST on February 24th. The 1st letter ballot failed with 61.81% approval and 14.96% abstaining The plan is to review and develop resolutions to all remaining comments Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

March 2011 PAR Scope and Purpose Approved PAR Scope: An amendment that defines modifications to both the 802.11 physical layers (PHY) and the 802.11 Medium Access Control Layer (MAC), to meet the legal requirements for channel access and coexistence in the TV White Space Approved PAR Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to allow 802.11 wireless networks to be used in the TV white space Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

March 2011 Purpose, Principles and Vision/Outcome “If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.”* 11-06-0056-00-0000-cbp-and-david-allens-methods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done Purpose: the Task Group should create an amendment whose implementation in solutions is likely to receive Regulatory approval for operation in the TV White Spaces under the applicable regulatory rules in the different regulatory domains. Principles: The amendment should not duplicate functionality that is being standardized in other Task Groups. There is no need for backwards compatibility with 2.45 GHz ISM operation. The starting point was changes to Clauses 17 and 19 and Annexes D and E In order to meet international requirements and utilize multiple non-contiguous channels, use of the TGac PHY should be our focus Vision/Outcome: Use 802.11 PHYs to specify the basis for a system that the regulators can approve for operation in the TVWS bands. * Yogi Berra Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

TV Bands Regulatory Requirements March 2011 TV Bands Regulatory Requirements These [FCC] rules are primarily intended to ensure the efficient sharing of the TV Bands while protecting incumbent users The FCC has enabled this band for TVBDs if and only if the licensed users’ interests are protected We must not interfere Mitigation of any interference issue should not increase the enforcement requirements for the Commission Other regulatory domains will have their own sets of rules, but all are intended to protect licensed allocations in these shared bands Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

March 2011 Presentations Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Review the Comment Spreadsheet March 2011 Review the Comment Spreadsheet 11-11/277r11 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

General Comments Discussion Comment resolution March 2011 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

MAC Comments Discussion Comment resolution March 2011 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Thursday May 5th Agenda March 2011 Meeting call to order Modify and approve the agenda Administrative items Reminder and Call for essential patents Finish reviewing Padam’s document Continue comment resolutions 11-11-0647-00-00af-comment-resolutions-regarding-to-network-channel-control-ppt 11-11-0648-00-00af-comment-resolutions-regarding-to-network-channel-control-reason-result-code 11-11-0649-00-00af-comment-resolutions-regarding-to-information-elements 11-11-0653-00-00af-comment-resolution-lb171-mac-csm-secured-container 11-11-0654-00-00af-comment-resolution-lb171-mac-csm-misc 11-11-0655-00-00af-comment-resolution-regarding-to-enablement-advertisement 11-11-0655-00-00af-comment-resolution-regarding-to-enablement-advertisement-1 11-11-0656-00-00af-comment-resolution-regarding-to-enabling-signal 11-11-0656-00-00af-comment-resolution-regarding-to-enabling-signal-1 Recess Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Friday May 6th Agenda Meeting call to order March 2011 Friday May 6th Agenda Meeting call to order Modify and approve the agenda Administrative items including IEEE IP statement PHY discussion Update on P802.11ac Comment resolutions Review progress and plan for Palm Springs Adjourn Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

PHY Discussion Update on P802.11ac Discussion PHY comment resolutions March 2011 PHY Discussion Update on P802.11ac Discussion Carlson Wireless Technologies FCC filing http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021237357 PHY-lite – center frequency and 3 dB bandwidth specified but no other changes to PHYs PHY comment resolutions Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

TGaf Timeline – Updated March 2011 January 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 November 2010 TGaf Timeline – Updated March 2011 New Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: January 2011 Second Working Group Letter Ballot: May 2011 Recirculation Letter Ballot: July 2011 Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: February 2012 Initial Sponsor Ballot: March 2012 Recirculate Sponsor Ballot: May 2012 Final WG/EC Approval: July 2012 RevCom/Standards Board Approval: September 2012 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion Michael Montemurro, RIM

Any Other Business? None heard Motion to Adjourn Moved by: March 2011 Any Other Business? None heard Motion to Adjourn Moved by: Seconded by: Vote: Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond May 2007 doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/0679r2 March 2011 Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond Completed Steps | Future Steps Adoption of PAR and 5 Criteria Technical Presentations and Discussions Specify Any Additional Requirements, Comparison Criteria, or Other Documents Call For Proposals Presentation of Proposals Select from Submitted Complete Proposals to Produce a Draft Refine Draft Letter Ballot – January 2011 Recirculation – May 2011 Sponsor Ballot – July 2011 Recirculation – September 2011 Final WG/EC Approval – March 2012 IEEE SB REVCOM Approval – March 2012 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion Peter Ecclesine, Cisco Systems

3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution March 2011 3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution Call for Informal Comments Comment Resolution WG Letter Ballot Comment Resolution, Recirculation Sponsor Ballot Comment Resolution, Recirculation Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

References Go to https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents March 2011 References Go to https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents In the box labeled “All Groups”, pull down the menu and select “TGaf” Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion