1. SuperFrame and PHY Single Channel Parameters Further Elaborations
IEEE P Wireless RANs Date:
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 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
Carl R. Stevenson 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
>

2. Further elaborations on SuperFrame and PHY Single Channel Parameters

3. Necessary PHY Changes
Superframe preamble + frame Preamble + US subframe preamble
SuperFrame
The Superframe preamble shall be identical in format to the Frame preamble ( different PN sequences shall be allocated to superframe and frames)
Frame
The first frame preamble (F0) should be eliminated in a way that the superframe preamble will act on behalf of the first frame.
This will ease the computational burden which is needed in the first frame. Currently, the first Frame preamble is optional, this option should be eliminated from the standard (at least for Single Channel)

4. Proposed Superframe Structure
SF preamble
FCH
Frame preamble
SCH F0 F1
x x x x x x x x x
DL MAP
No preamble
No need for additional Frame preamble. No impact or adverse consequences concerning the MAC layer

5. US preamble
Currently the US preamble is optional. Since in the there is no US preamble (a standard that supports mobile CPE`s). Therefore the need for US preamble seems as a weak argument (our simulations indicates that the pilots in the Upstream possess sufficient information to allow adequate channel estimation. Thus, these will allow adequate estimation in fixed scenarios).
2. PN Sequences
The PN Sequences proposed in Runcom`s contribution are borrowed from the The big advantage of these sequences presides on the fact that they have been chosen to optimize PAPR at the transmitter and have been verified through numerous simulation studies by numerous parties.

6. Other advantages
Together with the proposal for identical preambles for Superframe and frames, the usage of the above mentioned PN sequences offer a large set of sequences with the important factor of simplicity of realization. For instance, the allocation of a subset of the PN sequences to Frame preamble and disjoint subset to Superframes preambles.
This will allow the user to distinguish between Superframes and Frames

7. Pilot Allocation
In the current D0.1 draft pilots are allocated every 9th subcarrier (DS) regardless to symbol number.
Bearing in mind that the maximal multipath (Max MP) determines the pilots density in the frequency domain through
Implies that the current pilot allocation (every 9th SC) gives corresponds to 1/18 Guard Interval which is not sufficient.

8. Pilot Allocation- Cont.
Pilots should be allocated in a manner that their position in odd and even symbols is different, so that the pilots resolution corresponds to Guard Interval.
Since the channel is assumed slowly varying, the pilots at 2 consecutive symbols may be unified (leading to the adequate resolution).
Choosing pilots allocation in the US that is identical to the DS would leads to poor estimation results in the US. This is so since in the US, channel estimation at each sub-channel makes use of only the pilots of the current subchannel (quite different than DS in which the CPE uses all pilots of the BS.
The recommended solution is similar to PUSC structure in the US and DS as adopted in