TGac PHY AdHoc Agenda, Minutes and Strawpolls – March 2012 February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 March 2012 TGac PHY AdHoc Agenda, Minutes and Strawpolls – March 2012 Date: 2012-03-14 Authors: Slide 1 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Abstract Agenda, Minutes, and Stawpolls for the TGac PHY AdHoc March 2012 Slide 2 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Important IEEE Links The following slides in this deck are believed to be the latest available however the Source locations are: http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs/about/CoE_poster.pdf For summary, see 11-07-0660-01-0000-opening-presentation Don’t forget attendance check during PHY AdHoc session. Slide 3 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Member Affiliation It is defined in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws, 5.2.1.5 as: “An individual is deemed “affiliated” with any individual or entity that has been, or will be, financially or materially supporting that individual’s participation in a particular IEEE standards activity. This includes, but is not limited to, his or her employer and any individual or entity that has or will have, either directly or indirectly, requested, paid for, or otherwise sponsored his or her participation. http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html Slide 4 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

Declaration of Affiliation February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Declaration of Affiliation Revision: May 2007 Standards Board Bylaw 5.2.1.1 5.2.1.1 Openness Openness is defined as the quality of being not restricted to a particular type or category of participants. All meetings involving standards development an all IEEE Sponsor ballots shall be open toa all interested parties. Each individual participant in IEEE Standards activities shall disclose his or her affiliations when requested. A person who knows or reasonably should know, that a participant’s disclosure is materially incomplete or incorrect should report that fact to the Secretary of the IEEE-SA Standards Board and the appropriate Sponsors. http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html Slide 5 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Affiliation Policy Requirement to declare affiliation at all standards development meetings and recorded in the minutes Affiliation not necessarily same as employer Declaration requirement may be familiar to some 802 WGs, though WG declaration process may evolve 11. What if I refuse to disclose my affiliation? As outlined in IEEE-SA governance documents, you will lose certain rights. In a working group where voting rights are gained through attendance, no attendance credit will be granted if affiliation isn’t declared. Similarly, voting rights are to be removed if affiliation isn’t declared. Affiliation declaration will be added to Sponsor ballot http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html Slide 6 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Highlights of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards Participants have a duty to tell the IEEE if they know (based on personal awareness) of potentially Essential Patent Claims they or their employer own Participants are encouraged to tell the IEEE if they know of potentially Essential Patent Claims owned by others This encouragement is particularly strong as the third party may not be a participant in the standards process Working Group required to request assurance Early assurance is encouraged Terms of assurance shall be either: Reasonable and nondiscriminatory, with or without monetary compensation; or, A statement of non-assertion of patent rights Assurances Shall be provided on the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved LOA form May optionally include not-to-exceed rates, terms, and conditions Shall not be circumvented through sale or transfer of patents Shall be brought to the attention of any future assignees or transferees Shall apply to Affiliates unless explicitly excluded Are irrevocable once submitted and accepted Shall be supplemented if Submitter becomes aware of other potential Essential Patent Claims A “Blanket Letter of Assurance” may be provided at the option of the patent holder A patent holder has no duty to perform a patent search Full policy available at http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6 1 Slide 7 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards 6.2 Policy IEEE standards may be drafted in terms that include the use of Essential Patent Claims. If the IEEE receives notice that a [Proposed] IEEE Standard may require the use of a potential Essential Patent Claim, the IEEE shall request licensing assurance, on the IEEE Standards Board approved Letter of Assurance form, from the patent holder or patent applicant. The IEEE shall request this assurance without coercion. The Submitter of the Letter of Assurance may, after Reasonable and Good Faith Inquiry, indicate it is not aware of any Patent Claims that the Submitter may own, control, or have the ability to license that might be or become Essential Patent Claims. If the patent holder or patent applicant provides an assurance, it should do so as soon as reasonably feasible in the standards development process. This assurance shall be provided prior to the Standards Board’s approval of the standard. This assurance shall be provided prior to a reaffirmation if the IEEE receives notice of a potential Essential Patent Claim after the standard’s approval or a prior reaffirmation. An asserted potential Essential Patent Claim for which an assurance cannot be obtained (e.g., a Letter of Assurance is not provided or the Letter of Assurance indicates that assurance is not being provided) shall be referred to the Patent Committee. A Letter of Assurance shall be either: a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the Submitter without conditions will not enforce any present or future Essential Patent Claims against any person or entity making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing, distributing, or implementing a compliant implementation of the standard; or b) A statement that a license for a compliant implementation of the standard will be made available to an unrestricted number of applicants on a worldwide basis without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination. At its sole option, the Submitter may provide with its assurance any of the following: (i) a not-to-exceed license fee or rate commitment, (ii) a sample license agreement, or (iii) one or more material licensing terms. 2 Slide 8 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards Copies of an Accepted LOA may be provided to the working group, but shall not be discussed, at any standards working group meeting. The Submitter and all Affiliates (other than those Affiliates excluded in a Letter of Assurance) shall not assign or otherwise transfer any rights in any Essential Patent Claims that are the subject of such Letter of Assurance that they hold, control, or have the ability to license with the intent of circumventing or negating any of the representations and commitments made in such Letter of Assurance. The Submitter of a Letter of Assurance shall agree (a) to provide notice of a Letter of Assurance either through a Statement of Encumbrance or by binding any assignee or transferee to the terms of such Letter of Assurance; and (b) to require its assignee or transferee to (i) agree to similarly provide such notice and (ii) to bind its assignees or transferees to agree to provide such notice as described in (a) and (b). This assurance shall apply to the Submitter and its Affiliates except those Affiliates the Submitter specifically excludes on the relevant Letter of Assurance. If, after providing a Letter of Assurance to the IEEE, the Submitter becomes aware of additional Patent Claim(s) not already covered by an existing Letter of Assurance that are owned, controlled, or licensable by the Submitter that may be or become Essential Patent Claim(s) for the same IEEE Standard but are not the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, then such Submitter shall submit a Letter of Assurance stating its position regarding enforcement or licensing of such Patent Claims. For the purposes of this commitment, the Submitter is deemed to be aware if any of the following individuals who are from, employed by, or otherwise represent the Submitter have personal knowledge of additional potential Essential Patent Claims, owned or controlled by the Submitter, related to a [Proposed] IEEE Standard and not already the subject of a previously submitted Letter of Assurance: (a) past or present participants in the development of the [Proposed] IEEE Standard, or (b) the individual executing the previously submitted Letter of Assurance. 3 Slide 9 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards The assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal. The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those Patent Claims, or for determining whether any licensing terms or conditions are reasonable or non-discriminatory. Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted as giving rise to a duty to conduct a patent search. No license is implied by the submission of a Letter of Assurance. In order for IEEE’s patent policy to function efficiently, individuals participating in the standards development process: (a) shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware and that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents; and (b) should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance. 4 Slide 10 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings 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 fixing product prices, allocation of customers, or dividing 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. --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 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. This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt 5 Slide 11 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

Important Questions about Patents February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Important Questions about Patents Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of that standard? Minute any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom. Slide 12 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

Ad Hoc Operating Rules (1/2) 11ac selection procedure (11-09-0059r5) b. A straw poll result of >=75% is required within an Ad Hoc to approve the resolution of all or part of an issue and forward that resolved item to the Taskgroup where it becomes a motion that requires >=75% approval to modify the specification framework or the draft specification. c. In the case a consensus can not be reached within an Ad Hoc group (a stalemate that prohibits further progress), the subject is moved to the Taskgroup if an Ad Hoc straw poll vote to move the subject to the Taskgroup achieves >50% approval. Slide 13 Slide 13 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Ad Hoc Operating Rules (2/2) d. A motion passing with >50% in the Taskgroup shall be sufficient to move an issue previously assigned to an Ad Hoc group to any Ad Hoc group. A straw poll vote of >50% is required in an Ad Hoc group to refuse an issue from the Taskgroup. e. An issue may be sent from one Ad Hoc to another if both the sending Ad Hoc and the receiving Ad Hoc approve straw polls for taking the respective actions with >50% approval. A notice should be sent to the reflector indicating the approval of a straw poll to move an issue. f. To be accepted into the TGac Draft specification, proposals from Ad Hoc group require a motion that passes with >=75% Taskgroup approval Slide 14 Slide 14 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre-motions or Straw Polls Before November 2010, All the straw polls in the PHY Ad-hoc session were done as a conventional name ‘straw poll’, regardless of whether they are for Task Group motion or not From November 2010 on, All the straw polls have been classified between pre-motions and (just) straw polls according to authors’ intention Pre-motions are for Task Group motion Straw polls are just sounding-out questions Both can be voted by every attendee at the PHY Ad-hoc, regardless of the status of his/her WG11 voting right This classification was suggested by Brian Hart (Cisco) Slide 15 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

PHY AdHoc Topics PHY AdHoc group discussion topics in document 11-09-1175-01-00ac-ad-hoc-groups-scope.ppt: Pilots Data tones Preamble Enhanced MCS Sounding Higher Bandwidth modulation Parsing and Interleaving Coding, STBC Spatial Mapping & Cyclic Delays Mask, Regulatory, ACI, Sensitivity, etc. - additional possible topics Slide 16 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Interpretive Guide – Text Coloring February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Interpretive Guide – Text Coloring Text coloring: Black = pending agenda item Red = item partially addressed Green = item completed Gray = item not addressed in the session indicated at the top of the slide Slide 17 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

PHY Ad-Hoc Agenda February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 Slide 18 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

PHY AdHoc Agenda March 12-15, 2012 11-12/0300, “Proposed Resolutions to Comments on Clauses 9.15 and 9.16”, Allert Van Zelst 11-12/0301, “Resolutions to Comments on Clause 22.5”, Allert Van Zelst 11-12/0393r1, “Resolution to Miscellaneous CIDs”, Vish Ponnampalam FYI, 11-12/0313r1 is a reference helpful for this submission Deferred resolution : CID 4094 11-12/0335, “D2.0-comment-resolution-clause-22.3.8.2.1, clause-22.3.8.2.2, Minho Cheong 11-12/0340r2, “clause-22.2.2”, Bo Sun Deferred resolution : CID 5110, 4072, 4236 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

PHY AdHoc Agenda March 12-15, 2012 (2) 11-12/0351r3, “Resolution for misc. CIDs for 7.3.4 and 7.3.5 and 18.3.5.5”, James Wang 11-12/0372r1, “LB187 Clause 22.3.20 resolutions”, Adrian Stephens 11-12/0386r2, “Proposed resolutions to comments on mask PPDUs”, Yusuke Asai 11-12/0411, “D2.0 comment resolution misc. CIDs”, Vinko Erceg Withdrawn : 4302 Re-assigned to MAC : CID 4699 11-12/0250r3, “clause 22.3.10 cids”, Eldad Perahia Resolved two deferred CIDs : CID 5185, 5187 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

PHY AdHoc Agenda March 12-15, 2012 (3) 11-12/0251, “clause 22.3.20 cids”, Eldad Perahia Deferred resolution : CID 5218 11-12/0291, “LB187 Clause 22.1, 22.2.3, 22.2.4, 22.4.3 Comment Resolutions, Youhan Kim Deferred resolution : CID 5119 (assigned to Sigurd) 11-12/0311, “LB187 CID 4574 Comment Resolutions”, Youhan Kim will be presented on Thurs. during this week 11-12/0333, “D2.0-comment-resolution-clause-22.3.4”, Minho Cheong Deferred resolution : CID 5138, 5141 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

PHY AdHoc Agenda March 12-15, 2012 (4) 11-12/0345, “LB187-clause-22-3-and-9-19-proposed-resolutions”, Raja Banerjea Deferred resolution : CID 4206, 5384 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

TGac Schedule in a Glance March 2012 TGac Schedule in a Glance Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday AM1 MAC AM2 PHY(Kohala 4) PHY (Queen’s 6) PM1 TGac PHY (Monarchy) PM2 COEX Evening Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

PHY Ad-Hoc Pre-Motions and Straw polls February 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0211r1 PHY Ad-Hoc Pre-Motions and Straw polls Slide 24 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong Page 24 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

Pre Motion #1 (March 12, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 4394, 4395, 4396, 4497, 4826, 4827, 4998, 5085, 5264 in document 12/0300r0? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 25 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #2 (March 12, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 4214 and 5393 in document 12/0301r0? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 26 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #3 (March 12, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 4589, 4519, 4221, 5310 in document 12/0393r1? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 27 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #4 (March 12, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 5155, 5003, 5299, 5475, 5156, 5157, 5300 in document 12/0335r1? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 28 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #5 (March 13, AM#2) Do you support resolution to CID 5287, 5108, 5109, 5288, 5111, 4074, 5112, 5115, 5113, 4075, 4237, 5114, 4076, 5290, 5291 in document 12/0340r2? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 29 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #6 (March 13, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 4587, 4588, 4266, 4004, 4007, 4581 in document 12/0386r1? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 30 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #7 (March 13, EVE) Do you support resolution to CID 4151, 4152, 5057, 5058, 4153, 5056, 4278, 4279, 5028, 5059, 5060, 5318 in document 12/0351r2? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 31 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #8 (March 14, PM#1) Do you support resolution to CID 4079, 4120, 4123, 4145, 4290, 4458, 4762, 4768, 4783, 4993, 5102, 5232, 5233, 5234, 5235, 5257, 5394, 5456 in document 12/0411r1? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 32 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #9 (March 14, PM#1) Do you support resolution to CID 4148, 5324, 5045, 5046 in document 12/0386r2? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 33 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #10 (March 14, PM#1) Do you support resolution to CID 5185, 5187 in document 12/0250r3? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 34 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Pre Motion #11 (March 14, PM#1) Do you support resolution to CID 4108 in document 12/0372r1? Yes: No: Abs: Pre Motion passes with no objection Slide 35 Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong

Straw polls No straw polls during this IEEE week Banerjea, Erceg and Cheong