doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [ MAC for 60 GHz Gigabit WLAN/WPAN- Monterey Update] Date Submitted: [16 March,2005] Source: [Bruce Bosco] Company: [] [Gary Baldwin}Company[] Re: [] Abstract:[Liaison report on MAC for use for c WLAN/WPAN applications- update with comments] Purpose:[To report on the updated status of MAC alignment to the needs of c] Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release:The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin MAC for c Applications Overview of some proposed applications: –Wireless gigabit ethernet replacement >2 Gbps P-MP and/or P-P –Digital video distribution With simultaneous analog TV option P-MP –Real time high definition video 3-D Virtual reality Interactive scenarios

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin –Data downloads “wireless firewire” P-P Examples: –“Ipod-like” device –Digital camcorder –For near-term applications, it might be proposed that most applications will require either Short, high data rate bursts –2 Gbps or greater or Very long, but lower data rate streams –~ 1 Gbps (possibly even lower) –Very low latency –Very high QOS

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin MAC for c Applications Questions and Concerns: What, in general, is the limiting factor for the proposed MAC in regards to maximum data rates? Latency  Doesn’t generally limit data rate Overhead  Worry about what the base rate would be; this tells how long the header duration is.  Lowest rate will dominate. Ratio of highest to lowest data rates should be 5:1 or less. Don’t handle low data rates by restrictions in the PHY; low rates are established to extend the range. QOS Others?  Disclaimer: Comments in bold italics are from James Gilb and John Sarallo in attendance at the SG3c meeting on 18 January 2005 as roughly transcribed by Bruce Bosco and Gary Baldwin and are not verbatim. Further editing was also performed in an attempt to capture the key points….

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin Will the MAC, as is, support ~2.5 Gbps data rates? What is maximum?  Will support 2.5 Gbps but some things need to be looked at: Clocks better than 25 ppm OR resync beacons Could subset of MAC be implemented that may ease data rate restrictions? At what costs?  No improvement Is MAC most able to support multi-gigabit data rates for –Burst-type transmissions vs  Bursty data transfer is not 15.3’s forte; wastes channel time –Continuous streaming ?  15.3 does this best –Or are both modes equally supported?  Yes. (?)

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin Recommendations from key MAC “consultants” on how to proceed –What areas to watch:  Get the PHY sketched out first  Channelization scheme  Aggregate = # channels X thruput  Calculation – spreadsheet in archives  Need to determine max framesize etc  SIFT + ACK = pure overhead  Refer to Table 61, MAC sublayer parameters GHz PHY dependent (see Appendix A)

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin Contacts and liaisons –Champion for.3c application  SG3c needs to promote own champion Other Comments:  CSMA with steerable antennas would, potentially, create all sorts of problems; would limit efficiency and throughput; steerable antennas might work better with TDMA.  Question was asked about TV transmission: should it be ack’d or not? Gilb has a demo doing that in the 2.4 band.

doc.: IEEE /0167r0 Submission 16 March 2005 Bosco, Baldwin Appendix A From Standard: