Page 1 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 IEEE 802 proposal relating to DFS and JPT5G proposal.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /0338r1 Submission March 2012 Hung-Yu Wei, National Taiwan UniversitySlide 1 DeepSleep: Power Saving Mode to Support a Large Number.
Advertisements

A Brief Introduction to the IEEE802.11h Draft
An approach to the problem of optimizing channel parameters March 2001 Vlad Oleynik, Umbrella Technology Slide 1 doc.: IEEE /152 Submission.
Doc.: IEEE /081r0 Submission January 2001 Shoemake, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Submission Page 1 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d1 Andrew Myles, Cisco Systems Report of ad hoc group relating to DFS and JPT5G proposal Andrew.
Dynamic Sensitivity Control V2
24-1 Chapter 24. Congestion Control and Quality of Service (part 1) 23.1 Data Traffic 23.2 Congestion 23.3 Congestion Control 23.4 Two Examples.
Channel Allocation Protocols. Dynamic Channel Allocation Parameters Station Model. –N independent stations, each acting as a Poisson Process for the purpose.
Ethernet – CSMA/CD Review
Doc.: IEEE /0049r0 Submission January 2007 Matthew Fischer, BroadcomSlide 1 Signaling of intolerance for 40 MHz transmissions Notice: This document.
5/5/20151 Mobile Ad hoc Networks COE 549 Transmission Scheduling II Tarek Sheltami KFUPM CCSE COE
David Ripplinger, Aradhana Narula-Tam, Katherine Szeto AIAA 2013 August 21, 2013 Scheduling vs Random Access in Frequency Hopped Airborne.
Presented at ICC 2012 – Wireless Network Symposium – June 14 th 2012.
Bands A & B update Andy Gowans Private Business Systems Unit UK Radiocommunications Agency.
CSCI 4550/8556 Computer Networks Comer, Chapter 5: Local Asynchronous Communication (RS-232)
Doc.: IEEE /1420r1Nov 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Impact of Preamble Error on MAC System Performance Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /1187r1Sep 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Discussions on the Definition of CCA Threshold
Local Asynchronous Communication
Noise and SNR. Noise unwanted signals inserted between transmitter and receiver is the major limiting factor in communications system performance 2.
POWER CONTROL IN COGNITIVE RADIO SYSTEMS BASED ON SPECTRUM SENSING SIDE INFORMATION Karama Hamdi, Wei Zhang, and Khaled Ben Letaief The Hong Kong University.
10. Satellite Communication & Radar Sensors
Doc.: IEEE /1081r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury HEW Simulation Methodology Date: Sep 16, 2013 Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0871r0 Submission June 2011 Power Saving in Beam Beamforming for 11ad Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-12/0281r0 March 2012 Jarkko Kneckt, NokiaSlide 1 Recommendations for association Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1207r1 Submission September 2013 Matthew Fischer et al (Broadcom)Slide 1 CID 205 BSSID Color Bits Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0256r0 Submission March 2010 Zhou Lan NICTSlide 1 Proposal of Synchronized Quiet Period for Incumbent User Detection Date: 2010-March.
LOCAL AREA NETWORKS. CSMA/CD Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection The CSMA method does not specify the procedure following a collision.
Doc.: IEEE / r1 Submission November 2006 Bill McFarland, Atheros Communications, Inc.Slide 1 Energy Detect CCA Threshold Notice: This document.
Multiple Access.
Doc.: IEEE /0880r2 Submission Scheduled Trigger frames July 2015 Slide 1 Date: Authors: A. Asterjadhi, H. Choi, et. al.
Doc.: IEEE r0 Amin Jafarian, Newracom 1 CCA Revisit May 2015 NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Amin
Doc.: IEEE /1101r3 Submission September 2008 John R. Barr, Motorola, Inc.Slide 1 Additional 40 MHz Scanning Proposal Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1110r0 Amin Jafarian, Newracom 1 September 2015 BSS-TXOP NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Amin
Doc.: IEEE < g Submission, Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title:
Doc.: IEEE /0799r2 Submission June 2014 Nihar Jindal, Broadcom Modifications to Simulation Scenarios and Calibration Process Date:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-12/535r1 May 2012 Jarkko Kneckt, NokiaSlide 1 Scanning and FILS requirements Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0307r0 Submission January 2014 Nihar Jindal, Broadcom PHY Calibration Results Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc: IEEE a 5 July 2005 Z. Sahinoglu, Mitsubishi Electric 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
SubmissionJoe Kwak, InterDigital1 BSS Load: AP Loading Metric for QOS Joe Kwak InterDigital doc: IEEE /0079r0January 2005.
Medium Access Control in Wireless networks
Doc.: IEEE /0079r0 Submission Interference Signalling Enhancements Date: xx Mar 2010 Allan Thomson, Cisco SystemsSlide 1 Authors:
doc.: IEEE /183r0 Submission March 2002 David Beberman, Corporate Wave Net, Inc.Slide 1 Single Burst Contention Resolution “Wireless Collision.
1 Ethernet CSE 3213 Fall February Introduction Rapid changes in technology designs Broader use of LANs New schemes for high-speed LANs High-speed.
Doc.: IEEE /0645 Submission May 2012 Open-Loop Link Margin Index for Fast Link Adaptation Date: Authors: Slide 1Yong Liu, Marvell,
Submission doc.: IEEE /0098r0 January 2016 Assaf Kasher, IntelSlide 1 Channel bonding proposals Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE af Submission Distributed Measurement Report Period for Interference Detection in af MAC Mar Chang-Woo Pyo, NICTSlide.
Doc.: IEEE /455r0 Submission July 2002 Mika Kasslin, NokiaSlide 1 Harmonized Standard from BRAN#29 Mika Kasslin.
Doc.: IEEE /0635r1 Submission May 2014 Dynamic Sensitivity Control Implementation Date: 2014-May Authors: Graham Smith, DSP GroupSlide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0881r1 July 2015 Woojin Ahn, Yonsei Univ.Slide 1 Regarding buffer status of UL-STAs in UL- OFDMA Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 Submission January 2012 Jarkko Kneckt (Nokia)Slide 1 Scanning with FILS Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-15/1060r0 September 2015 Eric Wong (Apple)Slide 1 Receive Operating Mode Indication for Power Save Date: Authors:
Support for Dynamic Channel Selection (DCS) in v
CCA Sensitivity Date: September 2017
Impact of LTE in Unlicensed Spectrum on Wi-Fi
January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d2
Reporting Mechanisms Needed for DFS to Support Regulatory Compliance
<month year> <doc.: IEEE doc> March 2011
Improvement to TWT Parameter set selection
The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator
Ethernet – CSMA/CD Review
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0 January 2018
3GPP RAN1 status on NR-Unlicensed
CCA Sensitivity Date: September 2017
March 2019 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Security vs. Sequence Length Considerations]
White Space Regulatory Issues
Interference Signalling Enhancements
Synchronization of Quiet Periods for Incumbent User Detection
Scheduled Peer Power Save Mode for TDLS
Presentation transcript:

Page 1 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 IEEE 802 proposal relating to DFS and JPT5G proposal

Page 2 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 An 802 proposal resolves most of the issues with the JPT5G proposal for RLAN DFS JPT5G has proposed an algorithm and parameters for RLAN DFS Elements of the JPT5G proposal are unsuitable for operation with proposes an improved method of determining the presence of a radar in a channel The 802 proposal has a variety of enhanced radar detection properties 802 needs to confirm and negotiate the provisional values for a variety of parameter values Summary

Page 3 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 JPT5G RLAN DFS proposal

Page 4 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 JPT5G has proposed an algorithm and parameters for RLAN DFS JPT5G RLAN DFS proposal: An RLAN shall not use a channel that: –It knows contains a radar –Has not been tested appropriately for the presence of a radar An RLAN shall test for the presence of a radar for at least: –30 seconds after changing to a new channel, if the channel has not been used before or it the channel has not been tested for at least 30 seconds during the last 24 hours –30 seconds if a channel was previously determined to contain radar –20% of each 10ms period where testing occurs during period when the RLAN is quiet An RLAN shall assume it has detected a radar during a channel test if: –The average received power in any 0.1us period is greater than –61dBm and; –it cannot prove that the received power is not from a radar An AP shall notify all STAs in an RLAN that they should stop using a channel (and possibly the identity of the next channel) within 6ms of detecting a radar JPT5G proposal

Page 5 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The values of the parameters in the JPT5G proposal are provisional 30 seconds The minimum period for which a new channel must be tested if the channel has not been used before or if it previously contained a radar or if it has not been tested for at least T startup during the last T maxage 100ns The maximum window over which the receive power must be averaged when measuring a channel for the presence of a radar -61dBm The maximum threshold for the average power, measured over T average, that indicates the presence of a radar 24 hours The minimum period after which the results of any old T startup tests for the presence of a radar in a channel are no longer valid. 20% The minimum proportion of each T cycle cycle that must be reserved for testing while a channel is being used 10ms The maximum length of a cycle, of which a proportion must be reserved for testing while a channel is being used 6ms The maximum period in which the RLAN must notify STAs to leave a channel after detecting a radar in a channel Provisional value Description of JPT5G proposal parameter T startup T average P threshold T maxage M test T cycle T leave Variable JPT5G proposal

Page 6 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 JPT5G RLAN DFS proposal issues

Page 7 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The JPT5G proposal could cause RLANs to operate poorly, particularly in capacity constrained systems Under the JPT5G proposal, any short energy burst above –61dBm during the test period will cause an RLAN to hop to a new channel The short energy burst could result from: –Random external noise –Packets or collisions from other RLANs in the same channel (multiple RLANs can operate successfully in the same channel, unlike HIPERLAN 2) A channel hop will usually cause at least a short break in RLAN operation and thus reduce network performance In an environment with many closely packed RLANs (a capacity constrained system): –An RLAN may never find a “clear” channel because other RLANs or radars are operating in all channels –If an RLAN finds a “clear” channel because no “near” STAs in the other RLANs happen to transmit loudly enough while testing then it or another RLAN may have to hop again when the “near” STA transmits; system instability may result JPT5G proposal issues

Page 8 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 Two of the provisional parameters in the JPT5G proposal too low for operation with secondsProbably reasonable 100nsProbably reasonable -61dBmProbably reasonable 24 hoursProbably reasonable 20%Probably reasonable 10msToo short and presupposes that radars can only be detected during quiet periods. 6msToo short for the communication necessary to coordinate channel change. Provisional value Evaluation of JPT5G proposal parameter T startup T average P threshold T maxage M test T cycle T leave Variable JPT5G proposal issues

Page 9 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE RLAN DFS proposal

Page 10 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE proposes an improved method of determining the presence of a radar in a channel An RLAN device determines that a radar is operating in a channel when in either a quiet period or a non-quiet period: –It receives at least [3, but >2] pulses of at least [–55 dBm] –It receives at least [5] pulses of at least [–61dBm] Pulses are defined to: –Start after a significant increase in power –Finish after a significant decrease in power –Have a width of [50ns-100us], corresponding to known radar types –Be periodic, within some tolerance, with a pulse period of no more than [1 second] –Have same power, within some tolerance More than one radar can be detected simultaneously by categorising each pulse by its periodicity, measured power and pulse width 802 proposal

Page 11 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The key to the 802 proposal is a multi-pulse, high power characterisation of a radar signal Assumed radar characterisation: High power pulses are more likely to indicate a radar and thus fewer pulses are required to confirm presence of a radar signal Low power pulses are less certain to indicate a radar and thus more pulses are required to confirm presence of a radar signal A pulse; with minimum number of pulses per burst Equal pulse periods Equal pulse widths Equal pulse power 802 proposal

Page 12 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 Properties of 802 RLAN DFS proposal

Page 13 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The 802 proposal for radar characterisation allows radar detection to occur during normal packet reception, thus reducing detection time for radars received at higher powers Pulses with equal widths, periods and power Significant increase & decrease in power indicates pulse start & end Start of packet End of packet More than a specified number of pulses (depending on power of pulses) indicates presence of a radar Method relies on radar reception at a power significantly higher than packet reception TPC may assist in reducing packet power and thus assist DFS operation 802 proposal properties

Page 14 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The 802 proposal avoids triggering a channel switch when random noise or packets and collisions from other RLANs are detected 802 proposal properties

Page 15 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 The radar detection time in the 802 proposal is a function of the radar properties and, for radars received at lower powers, the measuring properties of the RLAN Radar properties The detection time depends on the maximum time until an RLAN device receives either: –[5] consecutive pulses above the low threshold [-61dBm] at the receiver input –[3] consecutive pulses above the high threshold [-55dBm] at the receiver input The choice of the thresholds used depends on the: –Radar transmission power –Path loss from radar to RLAN –Position of RLAN in radar beam RLAN measuring properties Properties only affect detection of radars received at lower powers The maximum time between quiet measurement periods Period of quiet measurement periods Synchronisation between radar pulses and quiet measurement periods Note: most of these parameters also apply to the JPT5G proposal 802 proposal properties

Page 16 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE 802 Parameters of 802 RLAN DFS proposal

Page 17 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE needs to confirm the provisional values for a variety of radar detection related parameter values [8 dB]Significant increase/decrease of power indicating the start/end of a pulse [-61dBm]Low threshold for power of a pulse [5]Low threshold for minimum number of pulses in a low threshold pulse train [-55dBm]High threshold for power of a pulse [3]High threshold for minimum number of pulses in a high threshold pulse train Provisional value802 proposal parameters [100ns-100us]Pulse width [TBD]Tolerance for pulse widths of two pulses to be considered equal [ us]Pulse period [25%]Tolerance for pulse periods of two pulses to be considered equal 802 proposal parameters

Page 18 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE needs to confirm the provisional values for a variety of parameter values that were probably reasonable in the JPT5G proposal [30 seconds] The period for which a new channel must be tested if the channel has not been used before or if it previously contained a radar or if it has not been tested for at least T startup during the last T maxage [24 hours] The period after which the results of any old T startup tests for the presence of a radar in a channel are no longer valid. Provisional value Description of JPT5G proposal parameter T startup T maxage Variable

Page 19 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE proposes two new parameters related to the duration of interference T detection - The time to detect a radar from when it starts –JPT5G’s proposal does not explicitly specify this parameter –Likely to be shorter than for the JPT5G proposal for radars received with higher powers; these radars do not require a quiet period for detection –If we specify this parameter (as a function of each radar type) then there is no need to specify frequency of quiet time and length of quiet time T activity - The total time during which RLAN devices may operate in the channel after detection of a radar –JPT5G specified 6ms –Option 1 on the following slide needs T activity to be [200ms] in 802 to allow the control traffic necessary to organise an orderly departure of the entire RLAN –Option 2, using the aggregate approach of on the following slide would require a total transmission time in the medium significantly less than [200 ms] 802 proposal parameters

Page 20 January 2002 doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/018A-d5 IEEE proposes two options related to the duration of RLAN activity after radar detection 802 proposal parameters Option 1 Option 2 Radar startsRadar detected T detection Maximum RLAN activity time Aggregate RLAN activity time T activity