Doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 1 Proposed Amendment of 802.11a to address Japanese bands and rules Comments.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /398-r0 Submission July 2001 Vic Hayes, Agere SystemsSlide 1 Closing Report of Radio Regulations to Plenary Working Group meetings.
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /0022r0 Submission July 2005 Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm Inc.Slide 1 Discussion on Contention-based Protocol (CBP) Study Group Notice:
Doc.: IEEE /023r0 Submission July 2002 Carl R. Stevenson, Agere Systems Motion to SEC Motion by: Stevenson/ Seconded by: O’Hara Agenda:
Doc.: IEEE /468r1 Submission July 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 1 WNG Committee Report Vancouver, BC July 2002.
Doc.: IEEE /480r0 Submission July 2002 Peter Ecclesine, Cisco Systems, et alSlide 1 Preparation of PAR and 5 Criterion addressing Japan’s 4.9-5GHz.
IEEE r q Submission Sept 2014 B. Rolfe (BCA)Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area.
Doc.: IEEE /527r1 Submission November 2001 John Barr, MotorolaSlide 1 Project: IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Doc.: IEEE /0765r0 Submission July 2005 Jesse Walker (Intel Corporation) Slide 1 Motion Move To form an IEEE Study Group to receive WLAN.
Doc.: IEEE f Submission September 2010 Tim Harrington, Zebra Enterprise Solutions Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless.
Doc.: IEEE 802.RR-02/050 Submission March 2002 Vic Hayes, Agere SystemsSlide 1 SEC Closing meeting March 2002 Agenda item 4.6 Reply Comment to FCC.
Submission doc.: IEEE ai September 2012 Lei Wang, InterDigital CommunicationsSlide 1 Ad Hoc Discussions of ai Passive Scanning during.
Doc.: IEEE /288r0 Submission July 2001May 2001 John Barr, MotorolaSlide 1 Project: IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Doc.: IEEE /011 Submission January 2000 Al Petrick, ParkerVision TGd IEEE – TGd Jan 10 –15, 2000 Tel Aviv, Israel.
Doc.: IEEE leci SGLECIM November 2010 Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPAN) Submission Title:
Doc.: IEEE /1445r1 Submission TGad November 2011 Closing Report November 2011 Eldad Perahia, Intel CorporationSlide 1 Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0192r0 Submission September 2006 Edgar Reihl, Shure IncorporatedSlide 1 Shure Comments to TG1 IEEE P Wireless RANs Date:
Doc.: IEEE /146r0 Submission November 1999 Robert F. Heile, GTESlide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Doc.: 18-14/0078 Submission November, 2014 Michael Lynch, MJ Lynch & Associates LLCSlide 1 RR-TAG Closing Report Notice: This document has been prepared.
Doc.: IEEE /001r0 Submission May 2002 Carl R. Stevenson, Agere SystemsSlide 1 Opening report RR-TAG to Radio Working Groups May 2002 meeting.
Doc.: IEEE f Submission March 2011 Mike McInnis, The Boeing Company Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area.
Doc.: IEEE /129r0 Submission May 2000 Vic Hayes, Lucent TechnologiesSlide 1 Report from the Regulatory ad-hoc meeting doc 00/124 Vic Hayes.
Doc.: IEEE /329r0 Submission Robert F. Heile July-2002 Slide Task Group 4 Low Rate WPANS 77 out of 89 voters have participated 66 Yes.
Doc.: IEEE /360r0 Submission September 2002 Stan Bottoms, ConsultantSlide 1 Project: IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Doc.: IEEE /0041r1 AP Location Capability January 2007 Donghee Shim et alSlide 1 AP Location Capability Notice: This document has been prepared.
Doc.: IEEE r0 Submission November 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg Chairperson IEEE TGg Chairs Status Update Matthew B. Shoemake TGg Chairperson.
Doc.: IEEE /57 Submission March 1999 Bob Heile, GTESlide Working Group Report to ExCom Thursday, March 11, 1999 Wireless Personal Area.
Doc.: IEEE /759r0 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, Intersil TK Tan, PhilipsSlide 1 Proposal to Amend a to address Japanese bands.
Doc.: IEEE /262r1 Submission July 2002 Dr. John R. Barr, MotorolaSlide 1 Project: IEEE Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
Doc.: Submission July 2010 D. Stanley (Aruba), B.Kraemer (Marvell) Slide 1 P802.11v report to EC on request for conditional approval to proceed.
Doc.: IEEE /1845r0 Submission November 2006 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 1 10 MHz Channels Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE.
sec1 IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN: Single_Radio_HO_Response_Comments Title: Response for comments on proposed.
Doc.: IEEE /201 Submission March 2001 Al Petrick, ParkerVision, Bruce Kraemer IntersilSlide 1 Ad-Hoc Publicity Committee Joint /.15 Report.
Doc.: IEEE /024r1 Submission Jan 12-16, 2004 TK Tan (Philips) Slide 1 WNG SC Committee Report IEEE , Vancouver, Canada, Jan 12-16, 2004.
VHT SG Report to EC Date: Authors: November 2008 April 2007
Response to Official Comments
PAR Review - Meeting Agenda and Comment slides - Vancouver 2017
PPC Closing Report for Session #88
IEEE 802 EC July Motions Date: Authors: Name
doc.: IEEE /479r0 Mika Kasslin TGh chair
March 2002 November 2002 SEC Overview of WG Proposal to Amend a to address Japanese bands and rules PAR and 5 criteria Bruce Kraemer, Intersil.
IEEE TGh Overview Mika Kasslin TGh Chair March 2001
Bruce Kraemer, Intersil (Vice-chair)
WNG Closing Plenary Report
AP Location Capability
November 2011 WG11 Motions for the EC
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e> <July 2018>
October 2011 doc.: IEEE ptc September 2012
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: TG4e Closing Report for Waikoloa Sep.
Mar Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [SG4w March 2018 Plenary Closing Report] Date.
Submission Title: f Task Group Closing Report for Atlanta, Georgia
Submission Title: f Task Group Mid-Week Report for Atlanta, Georgia
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e> January 2012
Comments on Sub 1 GHz license-exempt operation
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [A Brief Overview of Draft Approval.
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: TG4e Closing Report for Waikoloa Sep.
Submission Title: [Regulatory Update]
Proposed Modifications to VHT60 PAR
Proposed Modifications to VHT60 PAR
Proposed Modifications to VHT60 PAR
July 2014 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: TG3d San Diego July 2014 Closing Plenary Slides.
Coex Ad Hoc January London Agenda and Report
Preparation of PAR and 5 Criterion addressing Japan’s 4
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
Regulatory ad-hoc Chairman (Vic Hayes)
September 2002 doc.: IEEE /xxxr0 September 2002
Wireless Personal Area Network Study Group
Regulatory ad-hoc Chairman (Vic Hayes)
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e> January 2012
Response to Official Comments
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 1 Proposed Amendment of a to address Japanese bands and rules Comments on PAR and 5 criteria

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 2 Agenda  Where are we?  How did we get here?  What next?

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 3 Agenda  Where are we? Preparing PAR and 5 Criteria documents for submission to WG and then SEC  How did we get here? Documents from September: »Overview r1 »PAR r2 »5 Criteria r0 LB43 to submit to SEC passed  What next? Resolve comments and resubmit to WG & SEC

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 4 Documents  4 Documents prepared in Monterey (Sept ’02)  PAR Preparation r3  Plenary presentation r1  PAR r2  5 Criteria r0

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 5 Status  Letter ballot sent to WG voting members requesting approval to submit PAR and 5 Criteria to SEC for approval in November.  387 voting members 251 yes, 3 no, 10 abstain 68.2% response, 98.8% approval

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 6 Activities This Week  Collect comments from SEC by Tuesday 5 pm  Resolve comments on PAR & 5C from LB and SEC by end of Tuesday Revise text as necessary and post to server  Reballot in Wed plenary  Submit final text to SEC by 5pm Wed

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 7 Comments – Nov Comments received WG Comments (11 Total) Overall – 5 PAR – 3 5 Criteria – 3 SEC (1 comment) (1 Total) Other WG? (0)

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 8 Overall Comments on Proposed Project

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 9 WG11 Comments on PAR

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 10 WG11 Comments on 5 Criteria

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 11 Other 802 Comments WG Comments (1 Total) Since this band overlaps the public safety band in the US, it would be good to ensure that the PAR incorporates mechanism to not allow operation of devices in this band while in the US. SEC Comments (1 Total) We develop standards for world wide use. We should not be developing standards for particular countries. If JIS or some other interested party wishes to develop a "profile" of the standard that changes parameters for a particular market that is fine but not appropriate business for 802. The "compatibilty" response in the 5 Criteria is not appropriate. The correct response is that this project will destroy compatibility at the air interface for

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 12 Frequency Band New US Public Safety Band

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 13 Public Safety FCC Docket Report and Order Adopted Feb 14 ’02, Released Feb27 ’02 …allocating 50 megahertz of spectrum in the MHz band This allocation and designation will provide public safety users with additional spectrum to support new broadband applications such as high-speed digital technologies and wireless local area networks (WLANs) for incident scene management. The spectrum will also support dispatch operations and vehicular/personal communications. NPRM

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 14 Detailed Discussions

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 15 Comment on Formation (1 of 13) Comment 1. Too many task groups running. Wait until other TGs finished.  Move to reject the comment with the following response and proceed with no changes to PAR or 5C.  We recognize that plenary and interim meetings are busy periods of time. We deem that proceeding with this activity now is the best course of action. The WG chair will continue to manage the meeting agenda to ensure that no more than four sessions meet concurrently. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 19 No 0 Abstain 11 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 16 Comment on Formation (2 of 13) Comment 2. Change the title. Move to reject the comment with the following response and proceed with no changes to PAR or 5C. The PAR is intended to address the addition of new bands between 4.9 and 5.1 GHz but it will also address corrective changes to behavior in the 5.15 to 5.25 band. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Sheng Li Yes 18 No 0 Abstain 15 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 17 Comments on 5 Criteria (3,4,5 of 13) Comments 3. The word "laptop" is too restrictive. All WLAN devices should be included instead. 4.The statement is made "The PAR will define only one radio extension to a, such that laptops can be operated…". As a standards committee are we not interested in having ALL a devices capable of being operated? 5. The word "laptop" is too restrictive. All WLAN devices should be included instead.

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 18 5 Criteria wording (3,4,5 of 13) 3b) One unique solution per problem (not two solutions to a problem). The PAR will define only one radio extension to a, such that laptops can be operated in 4.9 GHz, 5.0 GHz as well as GHz. The PAR will define only one radio extension to a, such that WLAN devices can be operated in 4.9 GHz, 5.0 GHz as well as GHz. Move to accept the comments and replace the word “laptops” with “WLAN devices”. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Kazuhiro Okanoue Yes 30 No 0 Abstain 2 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 19 Comments on Public Safety (6,7 of 13) Comments 6. Since this band overlaps the public safety band in the US, it would be good to ensure that the PAR incorporates mechanism to not allow operation of devices in this band while in the US. 7. The 4.9 GHz band is allocated for public safety use in the US. I am concerned that Japanese laptops with a cards may be used in ad hoc mode in the US by visitors and may interfere with public safety radios.

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 20 Comments on Public Safety (6,7 of 13) Move to accept the comments and add the following text to: 5 Criteria Section 2. COMPATIBILITY It is known that one of the US Public Safety bands overlaps the newly proposed Japanese WLAN bands. As one method of preventing a STA from becoming a source of interference with the US Public Safety band radios, the Japanese banded 4.9 & 5.0 GHz stations could employ passive scanning and read AP beacon information to determine legal bands before transmitting when operating in infrastructure mode. IBSS operating mode could also present a source of interference, however, it is not allowed in Japan in 4.9 & 5.0 GHz and therefore can be disabled in these new bands. Additional interference mitigation approaches will be considered in the task group The base stations will not pose a problem since they are individually licensed and configured, while the client radios are not. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 22 No 3 Abstain 15 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 21 Regulatory Scope (8,9,10 of 13) Comments 8. The PAR and the 5 criteria are only going to cover standard changes according to Japanese specific regulations. If in other parts in the world (e.g. in Europe) individual countries also come up with different regulatory requirements how does the WG plan to deal with those? Would that always require a new project request or shouldn’t we try to find a general solution for that issue (e.g. a kind of informative annex). 9. We develop standards for world wide use. We should not be developing standards for particular countries. If JIS or some other interested party wishes to develop a "profile" of the standard that changes parameters for a particular market that is fine but not appropriate business for Updating for Japan is the tip of the iceberg. We need to form a plan to update the whole document for regulatory information.

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 22 Regulatory Scope Proposed response : This project does not impair the CSMA air interface, nor interoperation in US bands, as the changed behavior is keyed to knowing the country of operation (using ISO/IEC :1997 Country codes) as well as the frequency band to attempt communication on. In every regulatory domain known, it is required to know the country of operation before attempting transmission of radio energy (active probing), so that the transmission can be lawful. The PAR and Five Criteria intend to extend a to regulatory domains that regulate EIRP rather than Transmit Power, and recommend listening, which FCC and ETSI do not. Japan requires co-adjacent channel power restrictions (two channels away) and restricted modes (Peer-to-peer prohibited) rules that were not envisioned when.11a was created. The Scope of the PAR is limited to Japan, as that bounds the regulations that differ from existing US Part 15 rules and from Project h's scope. WG could use a maintenance PAR mechanism to address regulatory changes required in other bands or regulatory domains. Move to use the above response with no document wording changes. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Al Petrick Yes 21 No 0 Abstain 14 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide revision (11 of 13) Comment 11. If we amend the IEEE standard to comprehend interoperating in the new bands at 4.9 and 5.03 GHz in Japan then we should update the standard to comprehend the existing unique channels in Japan - channel 14 in the 2.4 band and channels 34,38, 42 and 46 in the band. It is implied that the requirements for Ch 14 are the same as those for Chs 1-13; that is not the case. Similarly the power and channelization for the band in Japan is not the same as that for the US. In fact, the existing spec only reflects requirements for the US in the 5 GHz band.

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide revision (11 of 13) Move to submit the following response with no changes to document wording  The PAR does intend to add the channel assignment and etiquette behavior in Japan for the previously allocated band.  The scope of this PAR does not address changes required to meet Japanese regulatory requirements in the 2.4 GHz band. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Yes 24 No 0 Abstain 12 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 25 11d Comment (12 of 13) Comment 12. Another standard that currently exists, and which is called out as needing "modification", is d. I would guess that this implies it has a "similar scope".

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 26 11d Comment (12 of 13) Response As indicated in the documents, the content of d will need to be adjusted to include country code information. Move to respond as noted above with no changes to the PAR & 5C documents. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Al Petrick Yes 24 No 0 Abstain 11 Motion passes

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 27 Channel Selection (13 of 13) Comment 13. The PAR indicates that channel selection is one of the purposes of the project (item 10). It then goes on to indicate that h contains power control features which will be used. There are also channel selection features of h which is seems to me should also be used if that is one of the purposes of the project.

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 28 Channel Selection (13 of 13) Response Move to accept the comment and provide the following response with a associated change to the PAR Section 15. The power control and channel selection mechanisms in 11h (draft) seem to be applicable for use and may be extended to the new channels. Current wording There are extensions in the TGh draft for power control that will be used in this project. New wording The TGh draft has power control and frequency selection mechanisms that may be used in this project. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Kazuhiro Okanoue Yes 27 No 0 Abstain 10

doc.: IEEE /668r3 Submission November 2002 Bruce Kraemer, IntersilSlide 29 Motion  Move to empower the WNG SC Chair & Vice-chair to incorporate the collection of wording changes previously approved (contained in 668 r2) into the PAR (564r2) and 5C (565r1) documents for approval at the WG plenary on Wednesday Nov 13 ‘02. Mover: Bruce Kraemer Second: Peter Ecclesine Motion passes unanimously (37)