C802.20-05-xx2 Summary of Conference Call – Feb 8 Reviewed contribution C802.20-05-04r3 to recap the status of evaluation criteria document Sections in.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /327r0 Submission May 2003 Adrian Stephens, Intel et alSlide 1 A Proposed Usage Model Methodology for High Throughput Task Group Adrian.
Advertisements

Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Status Update Farooq Khan IEEE Plenary Meeting Portland, Oregon, USA July 12-16, 2004.
Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Status Update Farooq Khan IEEE Interim Meeting Berlin, Germany September 12-17, 2004.
Traffic Models: Status/Discussion July 22, 2003 N. K. Shankaranarayanan (Shankar) AT&T Labs-Research IEEE C /73.
Simulation and Evaluation of Various Block Assignments Evaluation of multiple carriers deployed in a channel block evaluation criteria section.
1 PROGRESS REPORT on CHANNEL MODEL DOCUMENT Al Wieczorek 16 Sept
IMT-Advanced Technical Requirements Summary of status after 22 nd Meeting of WP8F.
CTIA Industry Standards for Estimating Battery Life
Doc.: IEEE /0604r1 Submission May 2014 Slide 1 Modeling and Evaluating Variable Bit rate Video Steaming for ax Date: Authors:
ACN: IntServ and DiffServ1 Integrated Service (IntServ) versus Differentiated Service (Diffserv) Information taken from Kurose and Ross textbook “ Computer.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0070r0 Jan 2014 Josiam et.al., SamsungSlide 1 Joint MAC/PHY Evaluation Methodology Date: Authors:
Retail Market Update June 5, New meter is requested for a specific customer’s location. 2.Application is filed by customer and/or the customer’s.
C r2. 2 Conference call summaries Major open issues  Open issues in Traffic models  Other open issues addressed by contributions  Other.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public 1 Version 4.0 Identifying Application Impacts on Network Design Designing and Supporting Computer.
Usability Issues Documentation J. Apostolakis for Geant4 16 January 2009.
Doc.: IEEE /702r0 Submission September 2003 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 1 Report of High Throughput Usage Model Special Committee.
A 4G System Proposal Based on Adaptive OFDM Mikael Sternad.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco PublicITE I Chapter 6 1 Identifying Application Impacts on Network Design Designing and Supporting.
C GPP2 TSG-C WG3 TITLE : UMB performance results SOURCE: TSG-C WG3 EMAH Contact to: Satoshi Konishi, Vice-chair of EMAH
Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Update Farooq Khan IEEE Plenary Meeting Orlando, FL, USA March 15-19, 2004.
RMS Update to TAC January 8, Voting Items From RMS meeting on 12/10/2008  RMGRR069: Texas SET Retail Market Guide Clean-up – Section 7: Historical.
1 IEEE Technology Selection Process Presentation of Contribution C Dan Gal Berlin, September 14, 2004.
Requirements Topics and Proposals as discussed at Session #4 of IEEE /16r1.
© 2006 Sprint Nextel WP5D Meeting Results
Doc.: IEEE /0786r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Discussions on System Level Simulation Methodology Date: Authors:
Donghee Kim Samsung Electronics ABSTRACT: This contribution shows the summary of changes in evaluation methodology text.
Doc.: IEEE /0568r1 Submission May 2004 Kevin Dick - Nortel Networks Slide 1 Usage Models for ESS Mesh Kevin Dick Kue.
Performance Evaluation of MIMO midamble design for IEEE m IEEE Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9) Document Number: IEEE C802.16m-09/1237.
Donghee Kim Samsung Electronics ABSTRACT: This contribution shows the summary of changes in evaluation methodology text.
Transient BCE for Proxy Mobile IPv6 draft-ietf-mipshop-transient-bce-pmipv6-00.txt Oliver Marco
MU-MIMO System Performance of 8TX codebook IEEE Presentation Submission Template (Rev. 9) Document Number: IEEE C802.16m-09/0803 Date Submitted:
C r3a2 Issues Discussed in Conference Call - Dec 7 Reviewed list of open issues Evaluation Criteria Status Report from the Plenary updated.
Issues in Evaluation Criteria Document November 15, 2006.
IEEE Session # 3 Closing Plenary Mark Klerer, Jerry Upton Vice-Chairs 24 July 2004 IEEE /13r1.
Doc.: IEEE /1406r0 Submission Nov 2013 Huai-Rong Shao, et al. (Samsung)Slide 1 Traffic Modeling for HEW Simulation Date: Authors:
May 16, 2005Chair, IEEE May 16, 2005Chair, IEEE Next Steps & Action Items from March 2005 Plenary Status Review - - May 2005 Interim.
1 A Cross-Layer Scheduling Algorithm With QoS Support in Wireless Networks Qingwen Liu, Student Member, IEEE, Xin Wang, Member, IEEE, and Georgios B. Giannakis,
Spectral Efficiency Ad-hoc March 18, Status and Continuation The ad-hoc group will meet again Thursday, March 19, 2004 at 7:00 am In preparation.
Simulation Data for Letter Ballot Comments on Quasi-guard Subcarriers and Reverse Link Waveform Lai King (Anna) Tee January 15, 2007.
Doc.: IEEE /0147r0 Submission January 2012 Rolf de Vegt (Qualcomm)) Slide ai Spec Development Process Update Proposal Date:
Some retrospect Link budget template –shall be completed for both the forward and reverse links for each deployment environment and each test case service.
IEEE C /87. Status of Evaluation Criteria IEEE Evaluation Criteria CG IEEE Interim Meeting September 15-19, 2003.
September 13, 2004Chair, IEEE Joint Opening September 2004 Interim Session #10 Jerry Upton- Chair Gang Wu – Procedural.
1 Texas Data Transport & MarkeTrak Systems (TDTMS) Update to RMS March 1, 2016 Jim Lee (AEP) – Chair Monica Jones (NRG) – Vice Chair.
Doc.: IEEE /117 Submission 11/99 Nada Golmie, NISTSlide 1 IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks MAC Performance Evaluation.
Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Status Update Farooq Khan IEEE Interim Meeting Garden Grove, CA, USA May 10-13, 2004.
ProjectIEEE Working Group on Mobile Broadband Wireless Access TitleOA&M Suggested Text Date Submitted
Doc.: IEEE /1054 Sept 2013 SubmissionYonggang Fang, ZTETX HEW Evaluation Metrics Suggestions Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Evaluation Criteria and Traffic Models Status Update
Status of Channel Models
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 November 2017
Evaluation Model for LTE-Advanced
Modulation and Coding set design for IEEE m system
IEEE Working Group on Mobile Broadband Wireless Access
Proposal for TGad Evaluation Methodology
TGn Simulation Methodology Ad Hoc Overview
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
ESS.VIP VALIDATION An ESS.VIP project for mutual benefits
TGn Simulation Methodology Validation Proposal
doc.: n Jeff Gilbert Atheros Communications
doc.: n Jeff Gilbert Atheros Communications
Proposed Addition to Evaluation Methodology
January 2017 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [IG LPWA January 2017 Closing Report] Date.
TGn Simulation Methodology Ad Hoc Overview
TGad Task Group Document Open Items
Proposal for TGad Evaluation Methodology
Modeling and Evaluating Variable Bit rate Video Steaming for ax
Summary of Conference Call – Feb 8
TGn FRCC Jan 2004 Report Adrian P Stephens
Presentation transcript:

C xx2 Summary of Conference Call – Feb 8 Reviewed contribution C r3 to recap the status of evaluation criteria document Sections in Evaluation criteria document (EC) V.13 updated during January's Interim meeting  section 3.2: Performance metrics for throughput vs SINR modified [04/88];  section 4.3.8: Video source data rate changed to 64 kbps [04/88,05/11] New open issue on the size of video buffer  section 4.1: 4 options listed for channel models mix [04/82r1]; Reviewed contribution 04/83r3a on system level simulator calibration  Merge of contribution 04/83r2 and 05/07r1  List of issues identified in the call: Fixed user locations need to be specified Clarify plots of C/I data Should MIMO channel models be considered in the calibration as well? Clarify the footnote on: "channel inversion power control"; Minimum user distance from BS needs to be consistent with the channel models document Clarifications on technology and link budget assumptions Specify success criteria of the calibration

C xx3 Issues Discussed in Conference Call (CC) – Feb 22 Discussed contribution on the open issue as related to link budget  New text proposed for clarification of link budget template in section 11  New subsection under “Output metrics” proposed to evaluate maximum range and data rate at the cell edge  Disagreement on the new output metrics for evaluation  Alternative text proposed via reflector after the CC Use of link budget template to provide information on simulation assumptions only  Further discussion in the following CC Reviewed contribution 04/83r3b on system-level calibration  An update to address issues identified in the previous CC  Major remaining open issues: Specific locations for fixed users Clarification on the success criteria Plan for the following CC & meeting session #13  Review evaluation criteria document for all remaining open issues  Adopt proposed text from the contributions based on consensus during the CC

C xx4 Summary of Conference Call – Mar 8, 05 Conclude discussion on link budget  Contribution revised with the alternative text as option 2  Original proposed text modified as option 3 New output metric: maximum range for a fixed data rate based on WG consensus  Participants agreed to include all 3 options in EC V.14 Conclude discussion on system-level calibration  Minor changes necessary to clarify the distribution of user locations  Participants agreed to adopt the proposed text into EC V.14 Review evaluation criteria document V.13r1  Proposed text for section 1.2, 2 and 3 to be included  Options for Internet gaming model to be included  Other updates that may be included in V.14 discussed  Identified sections that require additional clarification text  Inconsistency still exist between a few sections in the document

C xx5 Major Open Issues Receiver Noise model (section 3.3/3.4) Simulation flow description (section 5.1/5.2) Reverse link model (section 5.5.2) VoIP model (section 4.3.5) Internet Gaming model (section 4.3.9)  Text available for one of the proposed options Traffic model mix (section 4.4) Handoff simulation model (section 5.4/5.5) Fairness criteria/QoS criteria for various applications to be evaluated as in Table 11 for phase 2 evaluation (section 14/15):  VoIP  Internet Gaming  Video Streaming  Web Browsing  Broadcast/Multicast (model: not in the evaluation criteria document)

C xx6 Open Issues on Traffic Models Traffic models  VoIP model Related contributions: 04/12, 04/37, 05/05 Complete, specific model TBD  Internet gaming model Contribution 04/86, 05/06 4 options proposed in 04/86 Specific text for option 2 proposed in 05/06  Traffic model mix Entries in Table 5 for the percentage mix remain open Consistency between Table 5 and 11, for phase 2 traffic types Contribution 04/85r1 proposed traffic model mix  Not including all traffic types to be evaluated in Phase 2  Multicast/Broadcast One of the traffic types to be evaluated in phase 2 based on Table 11 No model has been discussed

C xx7 Other open issues addressed by contributions Receiver Noise model  Contribution C /89r1 discussed in January  Need agreement to include or refine proposed text Simulation flow description  Contribution C /85 Reverse link model  Contribution C /85 Handoff simulation  Initial contribution C /85  Update contribution C /10r1 => Need agreement to include or refine proposed text

C xx8 Other open issues not addressed by contributions 1 Fairness criteria/QoS criteria for various traffic types to be evaluated as shown in Table 11 for phase 2 evaluation:  VoIP  Internet Gaming  Video Streaming  Web Browsing  Broadcast/Multicast  Any other additional traffic types based on the resolution of “TBD”s in the Table 1: As of the beginning of meeting session #13, March 2005.

C xx9 Open Issues with options / text included in Evaluation Criteria Document V.14 System level Calibration  Proposed text included to address open issues in sections and 8  Based on latest version of the contribution 04/83r5 Channel model mix  Proposed options from contribution 04/82r1 included in V.13 during Interim meeting in January  Dependency on resolution in channel models document Link Budget  3 options included in V.14 to clarify section 11  Option 1 & 3 include a new subsection: 13.2 with additional output metric for cell edge performance Internet gaming model  4 options from contribution 04/86 included  Text for option 2 adopted from contribution 05/06

C xx10 Other Updates included in EC V.14 Alternative texts for sections 1.2, 2 and 3 Most changes from Berlin accepted Updates to description text in section : Full buffers model Updates to text in section 4.4: Traffic mix (Table 1: TBD) Clarification for:  Section 5.1.1: Distribution of users  Section 5.1.2: User usage model Section 12.3: Deployment characteristics  Further description text required for clarification Section : Computing of spectral efficiency  New text included for consistency with system requirements document Alternative text for section 14.1: Capacity performance evaluation criteria Section 16: Simulation and evaluation of various block assignments  New text included to request proponents for information on performance degradation as caused by adjacent channel interference  New text added to clarify the case of unpaired block assignments

C xx11 Phase 1 Simulation Methodology Full-Duplex, 19-cells, 3-sectors/cell wrap around configuration Traffic Type  Full-buffer (Hungry user; infinite backlog) model Channel model  Suburban Macro  Pedestrian B, 3 km/h, all users  Vehicular B, 120 km/h, all users Progress on open issues:  System Calibration Revised contribution adopted into EC V.14  Link Budget Revised contribution with 3 options included into EC V.14  Performance metrics Consensus on Section 3.2 achieved during Interim meeting in January  Receiver noise model Need to achieve consensus on the proposed or refine text in Contribution 04/89r1  Simulation flow Proposed text in Contribution 04/85r1 need to be reviewed for adoption into EC  Reverse link simulation model Modeling of feedback / reverse link signaling errors discussed in Contribution 04/85r1 Need further discussion or appropriate text for EC

C xx12 Phase 2 Simulation Methodology - Configurations Full Duplex, 19-cells, 3-sectors/cell wrap around configuration Traffic Types - as listed in Table 11 in the evaluation criteria document  VoIP (RTP) Model to be specified  Web Browsing (TCP)  File Transfer (FTP)  Internet Gaming (TCP) 4 options, but only one with detail text  Video Streaming (RTP) Buffer size to be determined  Broadcast/Multicast (RTP/UDP) Model not specified  Other traffic types in the Table are “TBD”  Percentage mix not specified

C xx13 Phase 2 Simulation Methodology - Details Channel models  Depending on adopted Channel models Open issues that required further discussion:  Handoff simulation model [05/08, 05/10r1]  Handoff performance metrics [05/10r1]  Control signaling model [05/10r1] Open issues that require contribution:  Fairness / QoS criteria for various applications for phase 2 evaluation

C xx14 Fairness / QoS Criteria Fairness criteria for applications other than the best effort traffic need to be specified  Phase approach table listed various applications to be evaluated: Real-time Interactive traffic (VoIP, gaming) Streaming traffic (Video streaming) Non-real-time data traffic (HTTP)  Performance criteria not yet specified QoS performance – Delay, Error Rate [VoIP: 05/05] Outage criteria What would be the performance criteria for each traffic type to ensure that the spectral efficiency is computed based on system resources being shared fairly amongst the simulated users in the same sector? Contributions are required if additional metrics are to be adopted