Task Group N Schedule March 15, 2004 Month 1998 doc.: IEEE 802.11-98/xxx Task Group N Schedule March 15, 2004 Bruce Kraemer IEEE 802.11 Task Group N (bkraemer@conexant.com) Bruce Kraemer, Conexant John Doe, His Company

Optimist’s Calendar 2004 2005 Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Pessimist’s Calendar (cont) 2006 2007 Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Extract from Selection Procedure 03-665 r9 Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Extract from Selection Procedure 03-665 r9 Steps of the Procedure TGn shall adopt : Usage Models for the IEEE 802.11n amendment. Channel Models that may be used for evaluation of proposals. Functional Requirements that must be met by all complete proposals. Comparison Criteria that must be addressed by all proposals. Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Extract from Selection Procedure 03-665 r9 The task group reserves the right to change the selection process and selection criteria as required with a 75% approval. Presenters shall classify their proposals as partial or complete. Complete and partial proposals shall be given up to 60 minutes presentation time including discussion. All proposal documents and related material (Presentation Material, Functional Requirements Declaration, Comparison Criteria Declaration and Technical Specification) shall be available to the voting members 30 days prior to the session at which they will be presented. Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Tabular Sequence of Events #1 Call for Proposals #2 Notice of Intent #3 Submission #4 Presentation Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Generic Time line of Events Dates Generic Time line of Events xx days yy days At least 30 days Event #2 Intent to present Full or Partial proposal notification submitted Event #3 Documents posted on IEEE server Technical Proposal CC Compliance Report FR Compliance Report Event #1 Issue call for proposals Event #4 “All?” Proposals Presented in TGn Session Events Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Assumption used for following slides All required documents will be completed in the May session. Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Time line – Opt 1 Bias toward start of presentations in July Dates Time line – Opt 1 Bias toward start of presentations in July Monday May 17, 2004 Monday July 12 No later than midnight GMT -5 Monday May 24 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday June 11 xx days yy days At least 30 days Guidance Actual 7 days 18 days 30 days Event #3 Documents posted on IEEE server Technical Proposal CC Compliance Report FR Compliance Report Event #1 Issue call for proposals Event #2 Intent to present Full or Partial proposal notification submitted Event #4 “All?” Proposals Presented in TGn Session Events Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Time line – Opt 2 Bias toward time to review Dates Time line – Opt 2 Bias toward time to review Monday May 17, 2004 Monday Sep 10 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday June 18 No later than midnight GMT -5 Monday July 19 xx days yy days At least 30 days Guidance Actual 30 days 30 days 50 days Event #2 Intent to present Full or Partial proposal notification submitted Event #3 Documents posted on IEEE server Technical Proposal CC Compliance Report FR Compliance Report Event #1 Issue call for proposals Event #4 “All?” Proposals Presented in TGn Session Events Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Time line – Opt 3 Bias toward time for presenter preparation Dates Time line – Opt 3 Bias toward time for presenter preparation Monday May 17, 2004 Monday Sep 10 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday June 18 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday Aug 20 xx days yy days At least 30 days Guidance Actual 30 days 50 days 30 days Event #2 Intent to present Full or Partial proposal notification submitted Event #3 Documents posted on IEEE server Technical Proposal CC Compliance Report FR Compliance Report Event #1 Issue call for proposals Event #4 “All?” Proposals Presented in TGn Session Events Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Strawpoll Which time line option is preferred? Opt 1 – begin presentations in July Opt 2 – begin presentations in Sept – long review Opt 3 – begin presentations in Sept – long prep Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

Further Planning- Today to May This session No official sessions beyond 3:30 pm could be added (5 activity limit, no slots released) However, room facilities are available for discussion of CCs, UMs, etc Ensures continuity, Preferable to conf call, continue with straw poll process Formal/final Voting in May Interim WG session may be proposed for April during closing plenary Poll: Those who would likely participate: Would try No way FRCC continues and will schedule teleconferences as authorized in September (03-0756) Motion to form a Functional Requirements and Comparison Criteria (FRCC) special committee that is chartered ton draft the 802.11n FRCC documents per the 802.11n Selection Procedure by Colin Lanzl and seconded by Bjorn Bjerke. Motion to enable the TGn Channel Model Special Committee and the TGn Functional Requirements and Comparison Criteria Special Committee to hold conference calls after the September 2003 sessions and until their work is completed by Colin Lanzl and seconded by Srini Kandala was adopted by unanimous consent Bruce Kraemer, Conexant

May Plans Complete CCs as necessary Complete Usage Models Confirm time line up to “Start presentations” Reset projections to publication Complete Call for Proposals letter Receive presentations Bruce Kraemer, Conexant