doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 1 IEEE Regulatory Ad Hoc July 2009 Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 2 Abstract This is the agenda and discussion topics for the first meeting of the IEEE Regulatory Ad Hoc Group, at the July IEEE 802 Plenary in San Francisco.

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Agenda Why a Regulatory Ad Hoc? Changes in the European regulatory specification for the 2.4GHz band – EN v1.8.1 IMT-Advanced document update July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 3

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Why a Regulatory Ad Hoc? To involve more of the IEEE technical experts in the efforts to discover and resolve potential regulatory issues Maximize the impact of this expertise without necessitating greater participation in meetings – issues condensed into one evening session –Early in the week to enable time to bring content to July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 4

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion EN v1.8.1 December 2007 ERM TG11 began a work item to write v1.8.1 of EN –Applications limited to 10mW TX power under EN want to be able to operate at 100mW Radio control model vendors Industrial controls manufacturers g (Smart Utilities Networks) Wireless speaker systems Meetings were dominated by the non-RLAN entities –Application-specific text was being added to the specification –Over time the document was becoming a “telephone book” –Decision was made to develop a “Medium Utilization” (MU) formula that would cover non-LBT applications Slide 5

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission The Ground Rules Prior to the June meeting of TG11, a small group met to decide on an approach that would encompass all applications in one formula This needs to be a “victim oriented approach” It must be: –maximally effective –maximally generic –maximally practical –minimally restrictive “The role of the EN can therefore only be to ensure that in case of congestion every compliant device does not take up an unreasonable fraction of the medium, therefore guaranteeing that any system making use of the same medium is not denied a fair fraction of it.” July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 6

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Initial Consideration July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 7 Bandwidth Time Area Bandwidth, Area and Time are primary considerations Two systems interfere if their Bandwidth overlaps Two systems interfere if they transmit at the same Time Two systems can interfere if they are located in the same Area

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission First Attempt at a Formula for MU July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 8 BW / 83.5 MHz Duty Cycle Power/100mW MU= (BW/83.5MHz)  DC  (P/100mW ); MU<[4%] Duty Cycle represents the time a system is active BW/83.5 MHz is the fraction of the 2.4GHz band utilized Power/100mW represents the fraction of maximum power

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Adjustments to the Formula During the June meeting the adjustments to the formula were discussed –Deployment Density should be included in the formula; NO –Industrial and Process Controls with alarms should have priority; NO –Manual blacklisting for frequency hoppers should be allowed; NO –The measure of Power should be TRP instead of EIRP; NO –Higher power for outdoor systems; sector – NO; pencil beam – YES –Bandwidth to be used; 6dBc – NO; 20dBc – YES –PSD is a better measure than Power; YES –Max. TXON time and min. TXOFF time must be considered –Bandwidth is not required; Power Density x Time is the best measure July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 9

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission How Does This Affect ? As an Interference Generator: –Note: Systems compliant with WiFi [sic] specification [x] or with IEEE standard [x] are considered compliant with this requirement. No further assessment or testing for clause is required –no changes required As an Interference Victim: –Devices once limited to 10mW in this band will now be allowed to operate at 100mW –Medium Utilization formula is intended to minimize interference July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 10

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Future TG11 Meetings It was decided that this work item will not be completed on schedule; chair will request an extension –Next meeting tentatively October 12 – 14, 2009 –After that – December 10 – 11, 2009 (following ETSI BRAN December 7 – 9) Next meeting will focus on test methodology and coming to a final agreement on the formula and maximum percentage for MU Plan is to complete the work in March 2010 July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 11

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Recommendations for An EU regulator has indicated that the current TG11 draft v1.8.1 is flawed; we should help TG11 define this in a technology-neutral way IEEE should work with to develop an opinion on the formula and test methodology and submit it to ERM TG11#22 in October IEEE /18 members who are also ETSI members should attend the next two meeting to ensure that RLAN interests are properly represented (and voted) As this will become an ETSI regulation, we need to consider global impact, as many countries follow ETSI July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 12

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission Proposal for Teleconference Coordinate with Thursday? 9:00am PDT? –Edgard’s preference July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 13

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion References ERM_TG11(21)22 - Notes of the 21st meeting of TG11 (ETSI membership required) Slide 14

doc.: IEEE /0846r0 Submission IMT-Advanced Documents July 2009 Rich Kennedy, Research In MotionSlide 15