1. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
March 2017
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: Reply to comments against new PAR/CSD for MG OWC
Date Submitted: March 14, 2017
Source: Volker Jungnickel
Company: Fraunhofer Heinrich Hertz Institute
Address: Einsteinufer 37, Berlin, Germany
Voice:
Re: Comments against new PAR/CSD for MG OWC
Abstract: This document provides reply to comments against new PAR and CSD for MG OWC
Purpose: Response
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
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI
<author>, <company>

2. Q&A from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC General
March 2017
Q&A from Bob Grow on OWC
General
Q: The project documents do not give any indication why this project should be done in    
A: Work is already ongoing in Experts are in Work is to be continued in
We just restructuring the work already done in to continue more efficiently.
Q: It gives no indication of distance the optical communications are to address, no indication of the  project having similarities to leverage from other projects.
A: Rephrase as : “at distances of m. The standard may leverage previous work in m and introduce MIMO, OFDM, relaying, and mechanisms enabling heterogeneous operation with existing RF wireless data communications standards. ”
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

3. Comments from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC (2)
March 2017
Comments from Bob Grow on OWC (2)
Q: From the documents, it is impossible to make the determination if the new PAR should be assigned to the WG, another WG, or a new WG. 
A: see first answer
PAR
Q: 2.1 Title: The title could apply to any 802 standard.  In the past, people even discussed doing an optical wireless PHY for  Though optical is distinctive, there should be more distinctive information in the title, e.g., something about range of the wireless communication PAN.  
A:  Leave as Multi-Gigabit/s Optical Wireless Communications
Nikola: If anything changes include „Specialty“ in the title
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

4. Comments from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC (3)
March 2017
Comments from Bob Grow on OWC (3)
Q:  5.1 expected number active on project: The number looks like WG members, not those expected to be active on P draft development and expert review. 
A:  Numbers should be left as they are. They also include people which do not have the opportunity to attend meetings but prepare input presented by active WG members.
Q: 5.2  Scope: The range of communication should be specified in the scope.  The purpose describes industrial applications as the driving application, yet requirements of automation islands are very different from communication across a factory floor that can be a range in kilometers. 
A: Rephrase the Scope as “and 10 Gbit/s at typical distances between m.” The range in kilometers is put in question, several 100 m should be the max. The factory floor will be covered by multiple networked OWC links.  
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

5. Comments from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC (4)
March 2017
Comments from Bob Grow on OWC (4)
Q: 5.6 Stakeholders: The stakeholders do not appear to align with the purpose statement.  Without reach information, are the stakeholders the manufacturers of the manufacturing equipment used to make aircraft and other transportation devices, or is the industry simply the users of the equipment that includes the proposed optical communication capabilities? 
A: Further clarification of the range has been given that should clarify the stakeholders.
Q: 6.1, b)  registration activity: If the standard is expected to specify the use of OUI, CID EUI-48 or EUI-64, it does have registration activity. 
A: Bob H. will provide an answer.
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

6. Comments from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC (5)
March 2017
Comments from Bob Grow on OWC (5)
CSD
Q: 1.2.1, a) Broad Market:  has industrial applications and is familiar with shorter range automation islands and longer factory floor requirements, but has no idea what a "personalized manufacturing cell" is other than jargon.  
A: Rephrase in CSD as “control of mobile robots in a more flexible manufacturing cell or at an assembly line for personalized products where fixed connections will be replaced by wireless in the future,”  
Q: Though less important, what relevance the speed of a train has for internal communications is not clear. 
A: Remove “high-speed” in front of trains
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

7. Comments from Bob Grow on 15.11 OWC (6)
March 2017
Comments from Bob Grow on OWC (6)
Q: Distinct Identity:  What is the phrase in transparent media supposed to mean? Wouldn't the non-fiber excluded by 1.2.1, b) be transparent?  If the requirement is to be only free space, line of sight, then the airplane environment would be very difficult to satisfy without reflective (i.e., non-transparent) transmission. 
A: Please replace by “With the exception of , this project is distinguishable from all other IEEE 802 standards due to the fact it utilizes optical wireless communications (OWC) instead of RF.”
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

8. Q&A from Paul Nikolich on 15.11 OWC
March 2017
Q&A from Paul Nikolich on OWC
PAR
Q: a) 5.2 Scope uses the vague term "mobility" which leaves much room for interpretation, I think it would help to define the term more precisely. Â Within this project's scope, please provide a specific definition of "mobility" (or reference a well known more specific definition).
A: Add „The standard includes adaptation to varying channel conditions and maintaining connectivity during mobility when associated to a coordinator or moving between coordinators.”.
Q: b) 5.2 Scope: what is the rationale for an estimate of 80 participants? Â It is optimistic, please try to be realistic.
A: Numbers should be left as they are. They also include people which do not have the opportunity to attend meetings but prepare input presented by active WG members.
Q: c) 5.2 Scope: please specify what "heterogeneous operation" means
A: The term „herterogeneous networking“ is commonly known in mobile communications. If still an issue, please replace by „hybrid and aggregated networking in parallel with existing RF…”
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

9. Q&A from Paul Nikolich on 15.11 OWC (2)
March 2017
Q&A from Paul Nikolich on OWC (2)
Q: d) 5.2 Scope: please consider adding a link range objective (1m? 10m? more? less?) under simply described nominal channel conditions (e.g., unobstructed line-of-sight)
A: Range has been already specified.
Q: e) 5.2 Scope: please consider adding a bit error rate objective for the above channel condition
A: Rephrase as „ data rates between 1 Mbit/s and 10 Gbit/s at typical distances of m at negligible error rate under both unobstructed and obstructed line-of-sight conditions.”
Q: f) 5.4 Purpose: Â The purpose reads more like the description of a the applications of network product family that embodies interfaces that conform to the (eventual) standard than the purpose of the the technical specifications the standard defines. Â This text is good, but reads like it belongs in 5.5 Need, not 5.4 Purpose. Â Please consider reworking the purpose along the lines of something like this: The purpose of the standard is to define free space optical interface specifications to establish high data rate transfer among end points. A:
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

10. Q&A from Paul Nikolich on 15.11 OWC (3)
March 2017
Q&A from Paul Nikolich on OWC (3)
Q: 7.1) Other standards/projects: Â We know has a Light Communication Technical Interest Group that may result in a project, this should be noted as a possibility even though it isn't definite. Â What research have you done to identify similar standards activities within the IEEE or external to the IEEE?
A: There are two other activities
ITU-T G.vlc: ITU-T defines a new recommendation for visible light communications (i.e. no IR and UV) and is currently in a process to align its objectives according work done previously in IEEE m. Vice versa, SG MG OWC has a PHY mode derived from ITU-T (G.hn), where it adds specific features to address the needs of OWC in its specialtly markets.
IEEE TIG LC: Main differentiation is that SG MG OWC continues work already done in m in a new framework and targets the needs of specialty markets while LC TIG will also address mass mareket needs with additional cost and energy constraints not considered in SG MG OWC.
Q: h) 4.2 Sponsor Ballot by March 2018 seems unrealistically optimistic for a new standard with this scope, please explain.
A: Was taken over from m. Work is progressed already. This is not a fresh TG but a continuation at an intermediate stage in a new structure intended to accelerate the work.. ..
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

11. March 2017
Q&A from on OWC
Q: Project Number: The Par Number of is potentially confusing, Please change.
Propose
A: Same as suggested by SG MG OWC.
Q:Title – why the “/s” at the end of Gigabit? Strictly speaking “Multi-Gigabit” is a size parameter rather than a speed rate. The /s may have meant “per second” but consider replacing “/s” and spell out the per second.
Suggested title change to “Multi-Gigabit per second Optical Wireless Communication”
A: Fine.
Q: 5.2 – Is the scope an overlap with the existing standard? The use of the word Optical seems to confuse this standard with the previous standard. 7.1 include description of differences to similar project
A: Include: „Going beyond IEEE std , this standard is capable of …“
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

12. March 2017
Q&A from on OWC (2)
Q: General CSD Comment: When citing standards, add “IEEE std” throughout CSD.
A: Go through CSD and change this, accordingly.
Q: Distinct Identity,
Consider including some of this to the need statement of the PAR to show the need for the project.
Typo “mutli” should be “multi”
Starting the statement with “With the exception” seems an odd way to start a statement of Distinct Identity. Suggest deleting the phrase.
Add “IEEE std” before when referring to the standard, and add 802 before 15.7 when meaning
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

13. Proposed Changes in PAR and CSD
March 2017
Proposed Changes in PAR and CSD
Title: Multi-Gigabit/s Optical Wireless Communications
Scope: This standard defines a Physical (PHY) and Media Access Control (MAC) layer using light wavelengths from 10,000 nm to 190 nm for optical wireless communications instead of using RF. The standard is capable of delivering data rates between 1 Mbit/s and 10 Gbit/s at typical distances of m. It is designed for point to point and point to multi point communications in both non-coordinated and coordinated topologies. For coordinated topologies, there may be one or more coordinators with the possibility of a global controller. The standard includes adaptation to varying channel conditions and maintaining connectivity during mobility. The standard adheres to applicable eye safety regulations. The standard may leverage previous work in m and introduce MIMO, OFDM, relaying, and mechanisms enabling heterogeneous operation with existing RF wireless data communications standards.
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI

14. Proposed Changes in PAR and CSD
March 2017
Proposed Changes in PAR and CSD
Need : Given the growing expectation of ubiquitous wireless connectivity in industrial environments, the need for unlicensed, high bandwidth, easy-to-use wireless communications technology, immune to radio frequency (RF) interference and which does not overload existing RF spectrum or necessarily require additional hardware, has never been greater. This standard specifically addresses these needs. In particular, optical wireless based solutions to this problem address a significant opportunity, extending to billions of existing industrial devices, to provide secure, non RF based communications between industrial devices and/or between industrial devices and fixed infrastructure on a one to one, or one to many or many to one basis at acceptable data rates. Potential applications include the control of mobile robots in a more flexible manufacturing cell or at an assembly line for personalized products where fixed connections will be replaced by wireless in the future, automated guided vehicles systems, small cell backhaul, network access in airplanes and trains, security monitoring in petrochemical plants, secure communications in nuclear facilities and hospitals, and many more. There is also a similar emerging need in commercial/business settings, especially in environments requiring high data rates and high levels of security.
Stakeholders: Industrial infrastructure and devices manufactures, plant engineering and construction, mobile robot vendors, aircraft and transportation manufactures, medical equipment manufacturers, lighting manufacturers, silicon providers, networking equipment manufacturers, and academic researchers
Volker Jungnickel, Fraunhofer HHI