WG11 review of Proposed PARs - March Plenary doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 WG11 review of Proposed PARs - March Plenary Date: 2012-03-15 Authors: Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Abstract This file documents the feedback for the proposed PARs from 802 Working group for consideration during the March 2012 Plenary. 802.15.4n – Comment Slide 3 802.15.8 - Comment Slide 9 802.15.4p – Comment Slide 14 802.21d - Comment Slide 16 802.3bk - No comment 802.1AX-Rev - No comment 802.1Qbu - Comment Slide 23 802.1AEbw – No comment 802.1Xbx - Comment Slide 14 802.1Qbv - No comment Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.15.4n PAR 2.1 Title: Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks--Part 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs) Amendment: Physical Layer Utilizing Dedicated Medical Bands in China 5.2 Scope: This amendment defines a physical layer for IEEE Std. 802.15.4 utilizing the approved 174-216 MHz, 407-425 MHz and 608-630 MHz medical bands in China. This amendment defines modifications to the Medium Access Control (MAC) layer, if any, needed to support this new physical layer. 5.4 Purpose: This document will not include a purpose clause. 5.5 Need for the Project: The Chinese Radio Administration committee has approved the 174-216 MHz, 407-425 MHz and 608-630 MHz bands for medical information transmission. IEEE Std. 802.15.4 has always supported operation in appropriate frequency bands and an opportunity is now available to extend the operation of IEEE Std. 802.15.4 into the bands approved for Chinese medical use. It is a good extension to amend the IEEE Std. 802.15.4 standards for MBAN systems using devices in the above Chinese medical bands. This Project will define an alternate PHY and the necessary modifications to the MAC that are needed to support the PHY operation according to the Chinese Radio Administration rules doc. # 423-2005 in the Chinese medical bands. 5.6 Stakeholders for the Standard: The stakeholders include medical equipment manufacturers, patients and healthcare providers both within hospitals and in residential environments along with service providers that offer remote support facilities Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Comments on 802.15.4n PAR March 2012 Title: Add numeric range for band doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments on 802.15.4n PAR Title: Add numeric range for band Title: Is 802.15 using a new short version of titles? 5.2 Scope: delete “, if any, “ 5.5 Need: Check title of Chinese Regulator reference. (Expected to see a SRRC reference) 5.5 expand first use of Acronym “Medical Body Area Network (MBAN)” 5.6 Stakeholders: Suggested replacement: “The stakeholders include medical equipment manufactures, patients and healthcare providers both within hospitals and in residential environments. Stakeholders also include remote support facilities service providers. 7.1: delete “Technically the answer is no, but” 7.1: change “15.j” to “IEEE P802.15.4j” 7.1: remove the “P” from “P802.15.16” and note that “IEEE Std.” is missing from the Project Standard Number field and in the Project title. Add “IEEE Std.” to “802.15.16” appears. (2 times) 7.1 Add a “IEEE P” to “802.15.4j” appears 3 times. 8.1: The Note for 5.2 would be better as part of the Coexistence statement in the 5c. And 7.1 is more appropriate for Unique Identity in the 5c. Delete both paragraph 1 and 2. 8.1 Add “7.1” prior to paragraph 3, and change the “P802.15.6” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.6” and change “15.4” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” 8.1 Add “7.1:” prior to paragraph 4, and change “is a similar amendment to 15.4n” to “is similar to this amendment,” http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0005-05-004n-chinese-mban-frequency-bands-study-group-par.pdf Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments on 802.15.4n 5C 1.a) Change “802.15.4” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” or Delete “802.15.4 is already used for this”. Change “802.15.4/LR-WPAN” to IEEE Std. 802.15.4” Change “Industries” to “industries”. Expand first use of LR-WPAN or replace with “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” 3.a) change “in these” to “in the” Coexistence: A Coexistence Assurance document is needed even if it is a very short one that states the information listed here… 5 a) this does not make sense. Rewrite. Look at using text from b) http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0007-05-004n-chinese-medical-body-area-network-5c.pdf Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.4n on PAR Comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.4n on PAR Comments Title: Add numeric range for band reject-Makes title unnecessarily wordy. Information is readily available in the amendment Title: Is 802.15 using a new short version of titles? MyProject uses current official title – we have no discretion. 5.2 Scope: delete “, if any, “ Accept 5.5 Need: Check title of Chinese Regulator reference. (Expected to see a SRRC reference) Replace Chinese Radio Administration with Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of the Peoples Republic of China. SRRC is no longer used. 5.5 expand first use of Acronym “Medical Body Area Network (MBAN)” Accept 5.6 Stakeholders: Suggested replacement: “The stakeholders include medical equipment manufactures, patients and healthcare providers both within hospitals and in residential environments. Stakeholders also include remote support facilities service providers. Accept http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0005-05-004n-chinese-mban-frequency-bands-study-group-par.pdf Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 6 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 6 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.4n on PAR Comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.4n on PAR Comments 7.1: delete “Technically the answer is no, but” accept 7.1: change “15.j” to “IEEE P802.15.4j” accept 7.1: remove the “P” from “P802.15.16” and note that “IEEE Std.” is missing from the Project Standard Number field and in the Project title. Add “IEEE Std.” to “802.15.16” appears. (2 times) accept 7.1 Add a “IEEE P” to “802.15.4j” appears 3 times. accept 8.1: The Note for 5.2 would be better as part of the Coexistence statement in the 5c. And 7.1 is more appropriate for Unique Identity in the 5c. Delete both paragraph 1 and 2. accept 8.1 Add “7.1” prior to paragraph 3, and change the “P802.15.6” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.6” and change “15.4” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” accept 8.1 Add “7.1:” prior to paragraph 4, and change “is a similar amendment to 15.4n” to “is similar to this amendment,” accept http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0005-05-004n-chinese-mban-frequency-bands-study-group-par.pdf Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 7 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 7 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.4n on 5C comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.4n on 5C comments 1.a) Change “802.15.4” to “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” or Delete “802.15.4 is already used for this”. accept Change “802.15.4/LR-WPAN” to IEEE Std. 802.15.4” Change “Industries” to “industries”. accept Expand first use of LR-WPAN or replace with “IEEE Std. 802.15.4” accept 3.a) change “in these” to “in the” accept Coexistence: A Coexistence Assurance document is needed even if it is a very short one that states the information listed here… accept- short statement included 5 a) this does not make sense. Rewrite. Look at using text from b) accept-rewritten http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0007-05-004n-chinese-medical-body-area-network-5c.pdf Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 8 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 8 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments on 802.15.8 PAR 4.3 consider submission date to RevCom being at least Oct 2015, but March 2016 may be more realistic. 5.2: change “defines the PHY” to “defines PHY”, change “specification” to “mechanism” 5.4: break into succinct sentences 5.5: Listed in Need, but not in Scope: “proximity awareness, Signaling overhead reduction”….things in the Need statement should probably be in the Scope statement if planning to meet the need. 5.6 Change “Content/Internet” to two separate lines 8.1 these paragraphs do not really add to the PAR delete them or move to 5C. http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0063-01-0pac-pac-par.pdf Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments on 802.15.8 PAR: Scope Proposed replacement for Scope statement (collapse the bulletlist to sentence fragments): This standard defines PHY and MAC mechanisms for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPAN) Peer Aware Communications (PAC) that are optimized for peer to peer and infrastructureless communications with fully distributed coordination. PAC features will include: discovery for peer information without association; discovery signaling rate of greater than 100 kbps; discovery of the number of devices in the network; scalable data transmission rates up to 10 Mbps; group associations with simultaneous membership in up to 10 groups; relative positioning; multihop relay; security; proximity aware; signaling overhead reduction; and operational in selected globally available unlicensed/licensed bands below 11 GHz capable of supporting these requirements. This is the scope statement being broke out to look at the feature list that was to be included. This is not what is expected to be the final Scope, but we ran out of time, and this is the work in progress. Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.8 on PAR comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.8 on PAR comments 4.3 consider submission date to RevCom being at least Oct 2015, but March 2016 may be more realistic. accept 5.2: change “defines the PHY” to “defines PHY”, change “specification” to “mechanism” accept 5.4: break into succinct sentences accept 5.5: Listed in Need, but not in Scope: “proximity awareness, Signaling overhead reduction”….things in the Need statement should probably be in the Scope statement if planning to meet the need. Partially accept- terms were not used consistently. Relative positioning = proximity. Same term now used in both scope and need. Signaling overhead reduction is implied, since it is the only practical way to achieve the features, so it was not additionally included in the scope. 5.6 Change “Content/Internet” to two separate lines accept 8.1 these paragraphs do not really add to the PAR delete them or move to 5C. Removed the dual band note but kept the coexistence note. http://ieee802.org/PARs/2012-03/15-12-0063-01-0pac-pac-par.pdf Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 11 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 11 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.8 PAR: Scope comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.8 PAR: Scope comments Proposed replacement for Scope statement (collapse the bulletlist [on next slide] to sentence fragments): This standard defines PHY and MAC mechanisms for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPAN) Peer Aware Communications (PAC) that are optimized for peer to peer and infrastructureless communications with fully distributed coordination. accept This is the scope statement being broke out to look at the feature list that was to be included. This is not what is expected to be the final Scope, but we ran out of time, and this is the work in progress. Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 12 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 12 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.8 PAR: Scope comments March 2012 March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r1 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.8 PAR: Scope comments PAC features will include: discovery for peer information without association; accept- no change needed discovery signaling rate of greater than 100 kbps; reject- while it is likely to always be greater than 100lbps, until further work is done it would be premature declare it– so we are keeping the word typically discovery of the number of devices in the network; accept scalable data transmission rates up to 10 Mbps; reject- again like the signaling rate this is likely but dependent on further work-so we are keeping the word typically group associations with simultaneous membership in up to 10 groups; again, retaining the word typically is more appropriate relative positioning; accept- no change multihop relay; accept- no change security; accept- no change proximity aware; signaling overhead reduction; not needed- see response to comment on 5.5 on slide 6 and operational in selected globally available unlicensed/licensed bands below 11 GHz capable of supporting these requirements. accept- no change This is the scope statement being broke out to look at the feature list that was to be included. This is not what is expected to be the final Scope, but we ran out of time, and this is the work in progress. Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 13 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Page 13 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 Comments on 802.15.4p PAR 5.2 typo: PHYsical should probably be Physical. Insert “Std.” to IEEE 802.15.4…. typo: lower case the Medium Access Control…. What is the range of the channel Bandwidth limits? Consider changing “accommodates transmit power levels greater than the 1 watt typical of US FCC Part 15 devices” to indicate the standard that you will actually be using (are you targeting Part 80 and/or Part 90 devices?) Change “and to meet United States” to “, primarily to meet United States” And delete “and similar regulatory requirements in other parts of the world.” 5.5 Insert “Std.” to IEEE 802.15.4…. Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response from 802.15.4p PAR comments March 2012 March 2012 Response from 802.15.4p PAR comments 5.2 typo: PHYsical should probably be Physical. accept Insert “Std.” to IEEE 802.15.4…. accept typo: lower case the Medium Access Control…. accept What is the range of the channel Bandwidth limits? Have ncluded more info-- “5khz and potentially as high as 20-30 MHz, consistent with any applicable regulations” Consider changing “accommodates transmit power levels greater than the 1 watt typical of US FCC Part 15 devices” to indicate the standard that you will actually be using (are you targeting Part 80 and/or Part 90 devices?) We concluded this clause added no value and have removed it entirely. Change “and to meet United States” to “, primarily to meet United States” reject- The US Congressional Act is certainly a major motivator and while the emphasis will be placed on the US needs, the intention is to be as global in scope as possible/practical. And delete “and similar regulatory requirements in other parts of the world.” 5.5 Insert “Std.” to IEEE 802.15.4…. accept Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance Slide 15 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.21d PAR comments 4.2 and 4.3 not enough time for Sponsor Ballot indicated. 5.2 Is multicast and group the same thing? So the parsing of the sentence is a bit confusing. Suggested change to Scope statement: This amendment defines support for: group management using multicast frames, handover of users from one group to another in the same access network, and secure multicast MIH (Media-Independent Handover) protocol exchange. 5.4 suggest that you move the first 2 sentances to 5.5, and put “this amendment will not contain a Purpose Statement”. 5.5 Add text from 5.4. insert “Std.” to “IEEE 802.15.4” Check that the proper version of the PAR is being used. Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response to 802.21d PAR comments March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Response to 802.21d PAR comments Comment: 4.2 and 4.3 not enough time for Sponsor Ballot indicated. Response: Changed 4.2: Expected Date of Submission for Initial Sponsor Ballot to 2014-03 21-12-0032-00-0000 17 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) 17 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response to 802.21d PAR comments(cont’d) March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Response to 802.21d PAR comments(cont’d) Comment: 5.2 Is multicast and group the same thing? So the parsing of the sentence is a bit confusing. Suggested change to Scope statement: This amendment defines support for: group management using multicast frames, handover of users from one group to another in the same access network, and secure multicast MIH (Media-Independent Handover) protocol exchange. Response: Multicast and group may not be the same thing, but our purpose is to support management of multicast groups. The scope has been revised as follows: “To add support in Media-Independent Handover (MIH) framework for management of multicast groups.” 21-12-0032-00-0000 18 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) 18 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Comments from 802.11 WG (cont’d) March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments from 802.11 WG (cont’d) Comment: 5.4 suggest that you move the first 2 sentances to 5.5, and put “this amendment will not contain a Purpose Statement”. Response: We moved the first sentence to 5.5, but would like to revise the purpose as follows: “The purpose of this standard is to enable the handover for a group of users across the same or multiple different access networks. Additionally, this standard will define mechanisms to secure multicast MIH protocol exchanges.” 21-12-0032-00-0000 19 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) 19 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Comments from 802.11 WG (cont’d) March 2012 doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0368r2 March 2012 Comments from 802.11 WG (cont’d) Comment: 5.5 Add text from 5.4. insert “Std.” to “IEEE 802.15.4” Check that the proper version of the PAR is being used. Response: Added one sentence from 5.4 to 5.5. (Pl. refer to next slide) Added “Std.” to “IEEE 802.15.4” (Pl. refer to next slide) Proper version of the PAR will be generated via ‘MyProject’ and will be circulated 21-12-0032-00-0000 20 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) 20 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.3bk Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.1AX-Rev Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.1Qbu PAR Comments 5.2: Should “the transmission of the preempted frame” really be “the transmission of the preempted frames”? Singular seemed incorrect. 5.3 Would other 802 WGs need to provide “support of pre-emptive forwarding in MAC Services” for end stations? Why only 802.3? 5.3 Why should this PAR start prior to 802.3 being ready to start? Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response to 802.1Qbu PAR Comments March 2012 March 2012 Response to 802.1Qbu PAR Comments 5.2: Should “the transmission of the preempted frame” really be “the transmission of the preempted frames”? Singular seemed incorrect. The text is correct. There is only one level of preemption being defined; therefore only one frame that can be preempted at a given time. 5.3 Would other 802 WGs need to provide “support of pre-emptive forwarding in MAC Services” for end stations? Why only 802.3? Right now, the only use case that we know of is for preemption in 802.3 networks. It is conceivable that other use cases may emerge in due course, but there are none on the table at present. 5.3 Why should this PAR start prior to 802.3 being ready to start? The requirement as far as the SA is concerned is that Qbu does not complete before any project upon which it is contingent. There is therefore no reason not to start work on the project before the 802.3 project starts. Slide 24 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.1AEbw Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.1Xbx PAR Comments 4.2 and 4.3 the time for doing sponsor ballot seems too short. NesCom generally expects as a minimum 6 months between dates. Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

Response to 802.1Xbx PAR Comments March 2012 March 2012 Response to 802.1Xbx PAR Comments 4.2 and 4.3 the time for doing sponsor ballot seems too short. NesCom generally expects as a minimum 6 months between dates. We have amended the submittal date to 02/2014 which allows 8 months between initial SB and submission. Slide 27 Jon Rosdahl, (CSR) Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

March 2012 802.1Qbv Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)

References March 2012 March 12-16, 2012, Kona, HI 802.1AX-rev, revision to 802.1AX link aggregation, PAR and 5C 802.1Qbu, amendment for frame preemption, PAR and 5C 802.1AEbw, amendment for extended packet numbering, PAR and 5C 802.1Xbx, amendment for MAC security key agreement protocol (MKA) extensions, PAR and 5C 802.1Qbv, amendment for enhancements for scheduled traffic, PAR and 5C 802.3bk, amendment for extended Ethernet Passive Optical Networks (ExEPON), PAR and 5C 802.21d amendment for multicast group management, PAR and 5C 802.15.4n amendment for China medical band, PAR and 5C 802.15.4p amendment for positive train control (PTC), PAR and 5C 802.15.8 new standard for peer aware communications (PAC), PAR and 5C Jon Rosdahl, (CSR)