1. Status, Next Steps and Call to Action
May 2005
doc.: IEEE /378r0
May 2005
Status, Next Steps and Call to Action
Date:
Authors:
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 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 grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE
Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures < ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

2. May 2005
doc.: IEEE /378r0
May 2005
Abstract
This is a summary of progress within TGT. It closes with a call to action.
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

3. Current Status Created draft 0.1 of our output document!
May 2005
Current Status
Created draft 0.1 of our output document!
Available on web site in members area
Contains some definitions that have had substantial discussion
Approved guidelines document in Atlanta meeting
11-04/1553r3
Discussed document structure several times
Most recent is 11-05/296r0
Developed a test template document
Most recent is 11-04/1540r1
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

4. What else have we done? Discussed a framework for methodology
May 2005
What else have we done?
Discussed a framework for methodology
Most recent: 11-05/177r0
Discussed various metrics
See list in later slide
Lots and lots of discussion about test environments
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

5. May 2005
What affects wireless performance? Have we discussed metrics for all these effects?
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

6. Presentations that have discussed metrics relevant to TGT
May 2005
Presentations that have discussed metrics relevant to TGT
Layer 2 metrics (11-04/1226r1, 11-05/033r0)
Throughput, forwarding rate, loss, latency, jitter, others
Rate vs. Range (11-04/1397, 11-05/033r0)
Or other link layer parameters vs. range
Rate adaptation (11-04/1466r1)
BSS transition time (11-04/989r1)
AKA “roaming time”
Adjacent Channel Interference (11-04/215r0)
Diversity (11-05/194r0)
Antenna performance (11-04/092r1? 11-04/1402r0?)
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

7. Correlation among Test Environments
May 2005
Correlation among Test Environments
Lots of discussion on the various possible test environments
Isolated, conducted, controlled, over-the-air, “real-world”, etc…
Still some disagreement on the various names for these environments
Haven’t been able to quantify a correlation between them
Should we simply describe test methodologies to be used in each test environment?
This would enable test engineers to perform the correlation
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

8. Correlation with Application Performance
May 2005
Correlation with Application Performance
Voice application
We’ve seen several presentations discussing this
Do we have agreement on use of E model as voice quality measure that drives wireless metrics?
Video application
Have had one presentation on the subject
No discussion of an objective quality measure – fertile ground for a literature search
Data application
What are the measures relevant to a data application?
Presumably throughput, anything else?
Would be good to have some theoretical backing here
Other applications, or other metrics specific to wireless that impact the applications?
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems

9. Call to Action We need further development of the metrics
May 2005
Call to Action
We need further development of the metrics
Let’s have proposals that describe the test methodology with the proposer giving the environment that is needed
Further discussion will tell whether other test environments are pertinant or important
I would like to get volunteers to “own” various metrics
Please write a proposal!
C. Wright, Azimuth Systems