Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 NGP TG Sep. Agenda Date: Slide 1Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 IEEE Task Group az Next Generation Positioning Bangkok, Thailand Sep. 13 th -18 th, 2015 Chair pro-tem: Jonathan Segev ( Intel ) Secretary pro-tem: Zhou Lan ( MediaTek ) Slide 2Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Abstract This presentation contains the IEEE NGP (Next Generation Positioning) Study Group agenda for the Sep. meeting. Slide 3Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Attendance, Voting & Document Status Make sure your badges are correct Please announce your affiliation when you first address the group during a meeting slot If you plan to make a submission be sure it does not contain company logos or advertising Questions on Voting status, Ballot pool, Access to Reflector, Documentation, member’s area  see Jon Rosdahl – Cell Phones Silent or Off Slide 4Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Logistics Attendance: You must register before logging attendance. You must log attendance during each 2 hour session. Documentation Use “TGaz” folder for documents relating to the TGaz activity. Note: Per WG leadership guidance, attendance count at the midpoint of each timeslot will be conducted during each TG meeting slot. Slide 5Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 6 Patent Policy Following 5 slides Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 7 Instructions for the WG Chair The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee: Show slides #1 through #4 of this presentation Advise the WG attendees that: The IEEE’s patent policy is described in Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws; Early identification of patent claims which may be essential for the use of standards under development is strongly encouraged; There may be Essential Patent Claims of which the IEEE is not aware. Additionally, neither the IEEE, the WG, nor the WG chair can ensure the accuracy or completeness of any assurance or whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a Patent Claim that is essential for the use of the standard under development. Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG meeting: That the foregoing information was provided and that slides 1 through 4 (and this slide 0, if applicable) were shown; That the chair or designee provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is personally aware and that may be essential for the use of that standard Any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom. The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made to any identified holders of potential essential patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter of Assurance. It is recommended that the WG chair review the guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual and in FAQs 14 and 15 on inclusion of potential Essential Patent Claims by incorporation or by reference. Note: WG includes Working Groups, Task Groups, and other standards-developing committees with a PAR approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board. Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 8 Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform Slide #1 All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants [Note: Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2]: “Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents “Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents) The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged No duty to perform a patent search Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 9 Patent Related Links Slide #2 All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development. Patent Policy is stated in these sources: IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual Material about the patent policy is available at If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit This slide set is available at Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 10 Call for Potentially Essential Patents Slide #3 If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance: Either speak up now or Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or Cause an LOA to be submitted Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 September 2015 Slide 11 Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings Slide #4 All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. Technical considerations remain primary focus Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets. Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation. Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details. Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 TGaz - Schedule in a Glance Slide 12Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep MONTUEWEDTHUFRI AM1NGP AM2NGP PM1 PM2NGP Eve

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Agenda Items for the Week Patent policy Approve previous meeting minutes (11-15/970r1).11-15/970r1 Review CSD and PAR modifications coming from EC and NesCom approval process. Generate TG officers recommendation for chair approval. Review TG development process and documentation. Responding to liaison letter from ATIS (Alliance for Telecommunication and Industry Solution). Presentations to inform the TG: Continued development of the use case documents. Problems statements Channel models Schedule teleconference times as needed. Slide 13Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Submission List for the week Slide 14Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep Document No.PresenterTitleTopic Jonathan SegevNGP Sep AgendaAgenda Deck Jonathan SegevLiaison from ATIS on Emergency Location Review and response to liaison letter Brian HartNGP Use Case TemplateUse cases Brian HartNGP PARReview PAR post IEEE-SASB approval Edward AuTGaz development documentationProgram development process Kare AgardhFurther Use Cases for Next Generation Positioning Use cases 11-15Rolf De VegtSpec Framework development processProgram development process Xun YangUnderground Location Use CasesUse cases Allan ZuUAV use caseUse cases

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Meeting Slot #1 Slide 15Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Meeting Slot # 1 Agenda Call Meeting to Order (1min) Patent Policy and Logistics (5min) Last call for Submission (0min) Agenda Setting (4min) Approval of previous meeting minutes (3min - Chair) Review changes from PAR approval process (15min – Brian H.) Closing the call for nominees for Task Group chair and nominees presentation (10min – Chair/nominees). Review and adopt NGP SG updated use case document (30min – Brian H.) TGaz development documentation (30min – Edward A.) Further Use Cases for Next Generation Positioning (30min – Kare A. As time permits) Recess Slide 16Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Submission order – Slot 1 Slide 17Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep Document No.PresenterTitleTopic 11-15/1003Jonathan SegevNext Gen. PositioningAgenda Deck Brian HartNGP Use Case TemplateUse case Brian HartPAR documentPAR Edward AuTGaz development documentationProgram development process Kare AgardhFurther Use Cases for Next Generation Positioning Use cases

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Approval of previous meeting minutes July meeting minutes (11-15/970r1 ) dated July 28 th.11-15/970r1 Motion: We approve document 11-15/970r1 as our meeting minutes for the Waikoloa meeting. Move: 2 nd : Y: N: A: Slide 18Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Presentations Slide 19Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Adopting Use Case document baseline Use case document ( ngp-ngp-use-case-template.pptx ) dated August 29 th ngp-ngp-use-case-template.pptx Motion: We approve document 11-15/0388r01 as our working draft baseline for the use case document. Move: 2 nd : Y: N: A: Slide 20Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Attendance remainder Slide 21Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Recess Slide 22Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Meeting Slot #2 Slide 23Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Meeting Slot # 2 Agenda Call Meeting to Order (1min) Patent Policy and Logistics (5min) Agenda Setting (4min) Generating TG chair recommendation for WG chair approval (10min). Review and respond to liaison letter form ATIS (45min). Presentations to inform the group on use cases, process, timelines (55min) Slide 24Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Submission order – Slot 2 Slide 25Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep Document No.PresenterTitleTopic 11-15/1003Jonathan SegevNext Gen. PositioningAgenda Deck 11-15/992Jonathan SegevLiaison from ATIS on Emergency Location Review and respond to liaison letter Kare AgardhFurther Use Cases for Next Generation Positioning Use cases 11-15/Rolf De VegtSFD documentTG process Xun YangUnderground Location Use CasesUse cases (as time permits) 11-15/1003Jonathan SegevTG process

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Attendance remainder Slide 26Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Recess Slide 27Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Meeting Slot # 3 Agenda Call Meeting to Order (1min) Patent Policy and Logistics (5min) Agenda Setting (4min) Generating TG chair recommendation for WG chair approval (10min). Review and respond to liaison letter form ATIS (45min). Presentations to inform the group on use cases, process, timelines (55min) Slide 28Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Submission order – Slot 3 Slide 29Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep Document No.PresenterTitleTopic 11-15/1003Jonathan SegevNext Gen. PositioningAgenda Deck Xun YangUnderground Location Use CasesUse cases (as time permits) 11-15/1003Jonathan SegevTG processTG process, goals and telecon.

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 How long to develop an amendment? The number of unknowns when evaluating a project timelines are substantial: Technical unknowns – channel development, different technical approaches, one protocol needs to solves several usages, selection between multiple options. Schedule unknowns – dependency on other amendments, comment resolution and technical quality of submissions, time needed to develop agreements. Slide 30Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 How long to develop an amendment? How to evaluate the schedule then? Compare to other amendments – do we have any reason to believe we’ll do better? Compare to one or more projects with similar complexity and size. Extrapolate based Make an educated guess on size and estimate length based on historical data progress. Close the loop and perform sanity check by receiving inputs from ITAs (e.g. WFA) as to the timing of market demand for products. Slide 31Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 How long to develop an amendment? Risk reduction for process evaluation Agree on a process that decreases the unknowns and helps to build agreements amongst group members. The process should facilitate: A focus on the what we want to solve (e.g. reduce overhead for scenario from X to 1/10X). Agree on the high level technological approach (e.g. agree on broadcast method/reduced unicast/ mix for scalable location) Focus on key elements of the solution (negotiation, scheduling, PHY element structure, PHY level protocol details) Go to greater details (specific messages used, message flow). Slide 32Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Possible Development Documents Use case/usage model document – marketing level like document (UX, without going into too much technical specifics and challenges). Functional requirement document – what are the requirements to which the solution needs to comply with. Channel model document – channel model specific to some usages or selection of channel model subset. Evaluation methodology – how to select between competing proposals Frame work document – evolving document for setting Slide 33Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Timelines Slide 34Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep StageDuration 11ac11ad11ae11ax forecasted 11az proposed PAR approval -> Approved Standard 64 months46 months60 months PAR approval -> Draft months21 months10 months26 months Draft 1.0 – Draft months6 months11 months8 months Draft Final 22 months19 months5 months26 months

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 TG documentation We agree on development of the following documents towards the TGaz amendment development: a.Use case document b.Channel model c.Functional requirements document d.Evaluation methodology e.Spec frame work Move: 2 nd : Y-N-A: Slide 35Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Goals for the Nov. meeting Continue with technical presentations. TG approval for use case document. Review and approve development process and timeline. Slide 36Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Teleconference Schedule - TBD Oct. 28 th 10:00 ET for 1hr. Do we need anymore calls? Strawpoll: We agree to the conference call schedule depicted above. Y: N: A: Slide 37Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Teleconference Schedule Oct. 28 th 10:00 ET for 1hr - do we need anymore calls? Motion: We agree to the conference call schedule depicted above. Move: 2nd: Results: Y:N:A: Slide 38Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Remainder to do attendance Slide 39Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 AOB? Slide 40Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Adjourned Slide 41Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Backup Slide 42Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 References Slide 43Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Some history Slide 44Jonathan Segev (Intel) July 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Historical performance data Slide 45Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep StageDuration 11v11u 11ac [1]11ad [1]Proposed for 11az PAR approval -> Approved Standard 64 months46 months PAR approval -> Draft months21 months PAR approval -> D months17 months D0.1 –> Draft months4 months Draft 1.0 –> Draft months6 months Draft 2.0 -> Final 22 months19 months Amendment size 442 pg.679 pg.

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Study Group Timeline - modified Slide 46Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep MonthMilestone / Plan of Action January (i)Formation meeting Initial discussion on PAR and CSD Presentations on use cases, usage models. March (p)Continue discussion on PAR and CSD Discussion supporting presentations. Study Group extension May (i)SG Final version of PAR and CSD Discussion on supporting presentations Working Group Approval on PAR and CSD PAR circulated amongst other WGs. July (p)Presentations. Resolve EC feedback on PAR and CSD. Executive Committee Approval on PAR and CSD Study Group extension JulyNesCom Approval on PAR and CSD (July 24/Sep. 4th submittal deadline). Nov. Sep. (actual)Task Group formation meeting

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Slide 47Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep ac Draft ac Draft ac Final.11ax Draft 2.0 (Mar 2017).11az Final PAR Approved (Sep. 2015).11az Draft 1.0 (Sep. 2017) NGP SG Launch (Jan. 2015) Spec Framework Document (Nov 14 - Jan 2016) 11az SFD TG formation meeting (Sep. 2015) We are here UCD Amendment text FRD CD

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Motions and strawpolls as needed Motion/strawpoll To instruct the use case document editor to add use cases depicted by slides x y z of submission abc to the use case working draft document. Move: 2 nd : Y: N: A: Slide 48Jonathan Segev (Intel) July 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Strawpoll#1 We support the addition of use cases depicted by slides a,b,c of submission 11-15/XYZrN to the use case working draft document. Y: N: A: Slide 49Jonathan Segev (Intel) July 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Motions on submission xxx Motion To instruct the use case document editor to add use cases depicted by slides a,b of submission 11-15/XYZrN to the use case working draft document. Move: 2 nd : Y: N: A: Slide 50Jonathan Segev (Intel) July 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Strawpoll#1 submission 634 We support the addition of use cases depicted by slides a,b,c of submission 11-15/XYZrN to the use case working draft document. Y: N: A: Slide 51Jonathan Segev (Intel) July 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r Template Instructions 1/4 To properly identify your PowerPoint presentation as an IEEE Submission there are 7 steps that you must complete, and 12 data fields that you must fill in. –Step 1. Obtain a document number (has the form yy/xxxx). –Step 2. Title slide: Fill in the presentation subject title text, the full date (in ISO 8601 format of YYYY-MM-DD), and the complete author(s) details (a total of 3 data fields). –Step 3. Abstract slide: Fill in the abstract text. –Step 4. Press “Office” button, Prepare / Properties. Fill in the 2 data fields: Author field = first author's name Title field = Title of presentation Slide 52Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r Template Instructions 2/4 –Step 5. Menu select View, Master, Slide Master, select the top master page (theme slide master). Place the document designator in the right hand side of the header. Document designator example "doc.: IEEE /9876r0", or "doc.: IEEE /9876r2" –Step 6. Menu select Insert, Header and Footer (5 data fields): Slide tab: –Date & Time, Fixed = venue date (as Sep. 2015, e.g. January 2005) –Footer = first author, company Notes tab: –Data and time, Fixed = venue date (as Sep. 2015, e.g. January 2005) –Header = document designator (e.g. “doc.: IEEE /9876r0”) –Footer = first author, company Click "Apply to all". –Step 7. Delete the four template instruction slides. Slide 53Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r Template Instructions 3/4 PowerPoint Submission Preparation Summary: –Things to do:7 –Fields to fill in:12 Slide 54Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r Template Instructions 4/4 Recommendations –a) Always create a new presentation using the template, rather than using someone else's presentation. –b) For quick and easy creation of new submissions, place the template files in the template folder area on your computer. Typical locations are: c:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Templates\802.11, or c:\Documents and Settings\User Name\Application Data\Microsoft\Templates\ –To create a new submission from within PowerPoint, menu select File, New, then select the appropriate template file. –c) When you update or revise your presentation, remember to check all 6 fields in steps 5 and 6 for the correct values. –rev: Slide 55Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 [begin placing presentation body text here] Slide 56Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /1003r2 Slide 57Jonathan Segev, Intel Corporation Sep. 2015