1. Coex Ad Hoc January Taipei Agenda and Report
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Coex Ad Hoc January Taipei Agenda and Report
Date:
Authors:
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

2. July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Abstract
Coex Ad Hoc in November Atlanta agenda and report regarding comment resolution of LB115 (802.11n), including straw polls
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

3. July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Highlights of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Participants have a duty to tell the IEEE if they know (based on personal awareness) of potentially Essential Patent Claims they or their employer own
Participants are encouraged to tell the IEEE if they know of potentially Essential Patent Claims owned by others
This encouragement is particularly strong as the third party may not be a participant in the standards process
Working Group required to request assurance
Early assurance is encouraged
Terms of assurance shall be either:
Reasonable and nondiscriminatory, with or without monetary compensation; or,
A statement of non-assertion of patent rights
Assurances
Shall be provided on the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved LOA form
May optionally include not-to-exceed rates, terms, and conditions
Shall not be circumvented through sale or transfer of patents
Shall be brought to the attention of any future assignees or transferees
Shall apply to Affiliates unless explicitly excluded
Are irrevocable once submitted and accepted
Shall be supplemented if Submitter becomes aware of other potential Essential Patent Claims
A “Blanket Letter of Assurance” may be provided at the option of the patent holder
A patent holder has no duty to perform a patent search
Full policy available at 1
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

4. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
6.2 Policy
IEEE standards may be drafted in terms that include the use of Essential Patent Claims. If the IEEE receives notice that a [Proposed] IEEE Standard may require the use of a potential Essential Patent Claim, the IEEE shall request licensing assurance, on the IEEE Standards Board approved Letter of Assurance form, from the patent holder or patent applicant. The IEEE shall request this assurance without coercion.
The Submitter of the Letter of Assurance may, after Reasonable and Good Faith Inquiry, indicate it is not aware of any Patent Claims that the Submitter may own, control, or have the ability to license that might be or become Essential Patent Claims. If the patent holder or patent applicant provides an assurance, it should do so as soon as reasonably feasible in the standards development process. This assurance shall be provided prior to the Standards Board’s approval of the standard. This assurance shall be provided prior to a reaffirmation if the IEEE receives notice of a potential Essential Patent Claim after the standard’s approval or a prior reaffirmation. An asserted potential Essential Patent Claim for which an assurance cannot be obtained (e.g., a Letter of Assurance is not provided or the Letter of Assurance indicates that assurance is not being provided) shall be referred to the Patent Committee.
A Letter of Assurance shall be either:
a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the Submitter without conditions will not enforce any present or future Essential Patent Claims against any person or entity making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing, distributing, or implementing a compliant implementation of the standard; or
b) A statement that a license for a compliant implementation of the standard will be made available to an unrestricted number of applicants on a worldwide basis without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination. At its sole option, the Submitter may provide with its assurance any of the following: (i) a not-to-exceed license fee or rate commitment, (ii) a sample license agreement, or (iii) one or more material licensing terms. 2
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

5. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Copies of an Accepted LOA may be provided to the working group, but shall not be discussed, at any standards working group meeting.
The Submitter and all Affiliates (other than those Affiliates excluded in a Letter of Assurance) shall not assign or otherwise transfer any rights in any Essential Patent Claims that are the subject of such Letter of Assurance that they hold, control, or have the ability to license with the intent of circumventing or negating any of the representations and commitments made in such Letter of Assurance.
The Submitter of a Letter of Assurance shall agree (a) to provide notice of a Letter of Assurance either through a Statement of Encumbrance or by binding any assignee or transferee to the terms of such Letter of Assurance; and (b) to require its assignee or transferee to (i) agree to similarly provide such notice and (ii) to bind its assignees or transferees to agree to provide such notice as described in (a) and (b).
This assurance shall apply to the Submitter and its Affiliates except those Affiliates the Submitter specifically excludes on the relevant Letter of Assurance.
If, after providing a Letter of Assurance to the IEEE, the Submitter becomes aware of additional Patent Claim(s) not already covered by an existing Letter of Assurance that are owned, controlled, or licensable by the Submitter that may be or become Essential Patent Claim(s) for the same IEEE Standard but are not the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, then such Submitter shall submit a Letter of Assurance stating its position regarding enforcement or licensing of such Patent Claims. For the purposes of this commitment, the Submitter is deemed to be aware if any of the following individuals who are from, employed by, or otherwise represent the Submitter have personal knowledge of additional potential Essential Patent Claims, owned or controlled by the Submitter, related to a [Proposed] IEEE Standard and not already the subject of a previously submitted Letter of Assurance: (a) past or present participants in the development of the [Proposed] IEEE Standard, or (b) the individual executing the previously submitted Letter of Assurance. 3
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

6. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
The assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal.
The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those Patent Claims, or for determining whether any licensing terms or conditions are reasonable or non-discriminatory.
Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted as giving rise to a duty to conduct a patent search. No license is implied by the submission of a Letter of Assurance.
In order for IEEE’s patent policy to function efficiently, individuals participating in the standards development process: (a) shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware and that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents; and (b) should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance. 4
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

7. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
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 fixing product prices, allocation of customers, or dividing 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.
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit
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.
This slide set is available at 5
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

8. Further Information January 2008 July 2007 doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r0
IEEE Code of Ethics
IEEE-SA Affiliation FAQ
IEEE-SA Antitrust & Competition Policy
IEEE-SA LETTER OF ASSURANCE (LOA) FORM
IEEE-SA STANDARDS BOARD PATENT COMMITTEE (PATCOM) INFORMATION
IEEE-SA PATENT FAQ
IEEE 802 LAN / MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE (LMSC) POLICIES & PROCEDURES
IEEE WLANS WORKING GROUP POLICIES & PROCEDURES
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

9. Overview Latest version of spreadsheet: 07/2693r4
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Overview
Latest version of spreadsheet: 07/2693r4
Total number of unique unresolved comments: 174
Goals:
review first draft of submissions for all CIDs this session
Resolve CIDs for submissions previously presented
Resolve all remaining CIDs by March 2008
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

10. Coex Ad Hoc Rules / Procedure
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Coex Ad Hoc Rules / Procedure
As a general rule, we will NOT be reviewing CIDs on a one by one basis
Resolution of comments will in most cases be based on submissions
Coex Ad Hoc chair will bring resolutions which passed by 75% or more for motion in TGn, with affirmation of Ad Hoc
Votes between 50% - 75% may be brought to TGn for further discussion and votes to break deadlock
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

11. Subgroups (1/2) January 2008 Coex 20-40 Coex reorg PCO L-SIG TXOP
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Subgroups (1/2)
Coex 20-40
103 comments
Clause 7, , , , , , , 11.17, S.4.2
Assignee: Matt F.
07/2742 in progress
CID 5223
Assignee: Darwin Engwer, 07/2478r1
Coex reorg
8 comments
Clause 11.9, ,
Assignee: Matt, as part of Coex 20-40
PCO
16 comments
Primarily 11.16
Assignee: Tomo
Submission date: Jan 2008
L-SIG TXOP
11 comments
Clauses ,
Assignee: Yuichi
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

12. Subgroups (2/2) January 2008 Coex cca Coex protection mechanisms
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Subgroups (2/2)
Coex cca
18 comments
Primarily clauses ,
Assignee: Eldad
Submission date: Jan 2008
Coex protection mechanisms
17 comments
Clauses , , ,
Assignee: Bjorn
07/2726 in progress
08/0004
CID 5796 assigned to Solomon
Coex GF
3 comments
Clause
Assignee: Doug Chan
07/2849 in progress
Misc
CID 5183
Commenter ed saying to reject comment
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

13. Submissions Related to Comment Resolution
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Submissions Related to Comment Resolution
Bjorn
n-lb115-coex-comment-resolutions-protection-mechanisms.doc (15 min)
n-lb115-coex-comment-resolution-cid-5628.doc (15-20 min)
Tomo
n-lb115-submission-for-category-pco-in-coex-ad-hoc.doc (45 min)
Solomon
n-lb115-submission-cid-5796.doc
Matt F.
n-lb115-cid5279-coex doc (lots of time) (+)
Yuichi
n-lb115-submission-coex-l-sig-txop.doc (1 hour)
Darwin
n-coex-cid-589.doc (updated to D3.01) (next week)
Eldad
n-coex-cca.doc (next week)
Brian
n-simulation-of mhz-cca-unfairness.ppt (next week)
Doug
Red indicates completed
submissions
(+) indicates submission
was discussed
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

14. Agenda for Friday Jan 11 Bjorn Tomo Matt F.
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Agenda for Friday Jan 11
Bjorn
n-lb115-coex-comment-resolutions-protection-mechanisms.doc (15 min)
n-lb115-coex-comment-resolution-cid-5628.doc (15-20 min)
Tomo
(45 min)
Matt F.
n-lb115-cid5279-coex doc (lots of time)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

15. Minutes for Friday Jan 11 07/2726r3 08/0004r0 January 2008
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Minutes for Friday Jan 11
07/2726r3
CID 5796 assigned to Solomon and removed from submission
CID 5627 – no issues with proposed resolution
CID 5535 – no issues with proposed resolution
CID 5100 – no issues with proposed resolution
No objection to accepting submission as resolution to CIDs and bringing to motion
08/0004r0
Some discussion on having a note showing “-3”. There is already such a note in
Eldad: since the name of the parameter includes “convolutional” will we get someone asking what the value is with LDPC?
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

16. July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
07/2990
Resolves Editor CID 5875, needs to be transferred to Coex
No objections to resolution
CID 5876
Bruce: question regarding “any channel width” phrase, any issue with limiting to 40MHz
Tomo: text in is the same type of wording
Eldad: “any channel width” is limited to Supported Channel Width Set
Everyone happy with current text, no objection with resolution
CID 5841 – no objections
CID 5359 – no objections
CID 5829 – no objections
CID 5109 – no objections
CID 5736 – no objections
CID 5737 – no objections
CID 5739
Adrian: Change the may to can in the second edit instruction
no objections to resolution with changes
CID 5740 – no objections
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

17. 07/2990 continued January 2008 CID 5741 CID 5830 – no objections
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
07/2990 continued
CID 5741
Adrian: can we make the second two sentences (in the first editor instruction) into a note, since they are informative. Limits comments.
No objections to change
No objections to resolution with changes
CID 5830 – no objections
CID 5831
Solomon: address the fact that traffic mixes are unknown in the rejection
CID 5360
Bruce: some grammar changes
Eldad: may needs to be changed to may
CID 5744 – no objections
CID 5358 – no objections
CID 5745 – no objections
No objection to accepting r1 of submission as resolution to CIDs and bringing to motion
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

18. July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
08/0064
CID 5796
No intent to change meaning, just clarifications
Bruce: grammar corrections
No objection to accepting r1 of submission as resolution to CID and bringing to motion
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

19. 07/2742 January 2008 July 2007 doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r0
Reviewed changes based on conference call discussion
CID 5045, 5485, 5424, 5447, 5850
CID 5850
Still have issue with changing channel width in IBSS when there is no DFS owner, changed color to green
Solomon: we have the same issue with changing channel in IBSS
Matt: general issue of dynamic parameters in IBSS when no one is in charge (see CID 5276 in MAC in 07/2999)
Adrian: might get a mix of DFS and non-DFS capable devices
Issue is held open by CID 5872
CID 5117
Adrian: making assertion the operation is fair, its never been tested. But we don’t necessary care if its fair.
Matt: changed “fair” to “sufficiently adequate user experience”
Allert: is this a “counter”
Luke is ok with “counter”
No further objection
CID 5485
Added rejection resolution text since conference call
No objections
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

20. 07/2742 continued January 2008 CID 5851 CID 5852, 5854 – no objection
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
07/2742 continued
CID 5851
Matt: Term BSS includes IBSS
Matt: Changed IDO STA to FC HT STA 17 to broaden the language to allow a non-DFS owner to start IBSS, but changes will be un-done since DFS rules in state a STA starting an IBSS in DFS band shall be the DFS owner.
Changed to reject
No objections
CID 5852, 5854 – no objection
CID 5180
Lots of discussion on whether to change “5 GHz” to “not 2.4GHz”, points raised:
There was only 2.4 & 5 GHz at time of 11n starting, now we have 11y
We have only thought about 2.4 & 5 GHz we don’t know what the 40 MHz coex issues would be in other bands
Tomo: FC 17 restricts to 5 GHz, which is in many other places. Changes only to would not be enough
To make all the changes to draft would be complicated, reject and leave for next task group
Allert: change to FC HT AP restricts to HT device in “other band”
Since the change was un-done, “FC HT” is not added anymore
No objection to rejection
Changes based on 5180 un-done
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

21. 07/2742 continued January 2008 CID 5853, 5855 CID 5856, 5858 CID 5857
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
07/2742 continued
CID 5853, 5855
Changed to reject, refer to 5851
No objections
CID 5856, 5858
CID 5857
Changed “HT AP or IDO STA” to “HT AP or IDO STA that is also an HT STA” in
CID no objections
CID 5030
Resolution text modified to indicate changes based on 2.4GHz language and 5 GHz language
CID 5860
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

22. 07/2742 continued CID 5861 CID 5862 – no objections CID 5031
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
07/2742 continued
CID 5861
Added reference to CID 5851 in resolution
No objections
CID 5862 – no objections
CID 5031
Added resolution text stating that the use of scan results is implicit on existing rules
Tomo: is there a reference to rules?
Matt: anything that causes a trigger event must follow the trigger
Continue with CID 5808 tomorrow
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)

23. Status at end of Friday Jan 11
July 2007
doc.: IEEE /2090r0
January 2008
Status at end of Friday Jan 11
Unresolved CIDs (not approved by ad hoc to be motioned in TGn): 144
20/40 group: 103
CCA: 16
GF: 3
Protection: 2
Reorg: 8
L-SIG TXOP: 11
Misc: 1
PCO: 0
CIDs in 07/2724 w/ no objections: 31
CIDs still needing review: 113
Eldad Perahia (Intel)
Eldad Perahia (Intel)