1. IEEE 802.11 TGaf DRAFT Meeting Plan and Agenda
April 2009
doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0
March 2011
IEEE TGaf DRAFT Meeting Plan and Agenda
Date:
Authors:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

2. April 2009
doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0
March 2011
Abstract
This presentation is the agenda and meeting plan for the meeting of IEEE TGaf taking place the week of March 14, 2011 at the IEEE 802 Plenary in Singapore.
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

3. Plan for the Week [MPM1, TAM1+PM3, WPM1+2, ThAM1+PM2]
March 2011
Plan for the Week [MPM1, TAM1+PM3, WPM1+2, ThAM1+PM2]
Approve meeting, ad hoc meeting and teleconference minutes
Review the results of LB171
Invite Andy Gowans to address D1.0 and the Ofcom DD plan
Divide the comments into categories and form Ad Hocs
Comment resolution
Group reassembly for accepting comment resolutions and listening to helpful presentations
Plan for May meeting, including an ad hoc the week prior, and teleconferences
Task Group Officers
Chair: Rich Kennedy (Research In Motion)
Vice-chair: Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Recording Secretary: Zhou Lan (NICT)
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

4. Monday PM1 Meeting call to order
March 2011
Monday PM1
Meeting call to order
Administrative items including IEEE IP statement
Modify and approve the agenda
Approve meeting, ad hoc and teleconference minutes
Review the results of LB171
Invite Andy Gowans to address D1.0 and the Ofcom DD plan
Divide the comments into categories and form Ad Hocs
Recess
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

5. Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
March 2011
All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants:
“Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents
“Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims
“Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)
The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group
Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged
No duty to perform a patent search
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

6. Patent Related Links
March 2011
All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.
Patent Policy is stated in these sources:
IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
Material about the patent policy is available at
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit
This slide set is available at
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

7. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
March 2011
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 or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of 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.
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.
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

8. Call for Potentially Essential Patents
March 2011
If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance:
Either speak up now or
Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or
Cause an LOA to be submitted
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

9. Other Documents and WebPages to Review
March 2011
Other Documents and WebPages to Review
Please review the documents at the following links: -  IEEE Patent Policy -  -  Patent FAQ -  -  LoA Form -  -  Affiliation FAQ -
-  Anti-Trust FAQ -  -  Ethics -  -  IEEE Working Group P&P -     
New 802 WG P&P:
New 802 LMSC P&P:
New 802 LMSC OM:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

10. March 2010
doc.: IEEE /0265r1
March 2011
Meeting Etiquette
IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization
Meetings are to be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization.
Individuals are to address the “Technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about the presenter.
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Stephen McCann, RIM

11. Task Group Chair’s Functions
March 2011
Task Group Chair’s Functions
[From Policies and Procedures of IEEE Project ™, subclause 3.7.3]
The TG Chair may decide non-technical issues or may put them to a vote of the TG. The TG participants and the Chair decide technical issues by vote. The TG Chair decides what is non-technical and what is technical.
The TG Chair is responsible for presiding over TG sessions.
The TG Chair shall operate the TG in an unbiased fashion. To maintain impartiality, the TG Chair shall refrain from taking sides in debate on technical motions.
It is the responsibility of the TG Chair to lead the TG in producing a quality draft standard in a timely fashion as specified by the specific PAR
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

12. Task Group Chair's Authority
March 2011
Task Group Chair's Authority
[From Policies and Procedures of IEEE Project ™, subclause 3.7.4]
To carry out the responsibilities cited in subclause 3.7.3*, the TG Chair has authority to:
Decide which issues are technical and which are non-technical.
Assign and unassign subtasks and task leaders or executors, e.g. secretary, subgroup leader, etc.
Speak for the TG to the WG.
Determine if an organization or consortium is dominating the TG, and, if so, raise the issue to the WG Chair.
Be representative of the TG during coordination and interaction with IEEE® staff.
* See slide 11
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

13. March 2011
Introduction
WELCOME to the ninth face-to-face meeting of IEEE TGaf!
On Friday, November 20, 2009 the IEEE TGaf was approved by the EC (10/1/4) with this motion:
Believing that the PAR and Five Criteria contained in the document referenced below meet IEEE-SA guidelines,
Move to forward the TVWS PAR information from 11-09/934r8 to NesCom.
On December 8th NesCom approved the formation of the Task Group for P802.11af
LB171 started on 1/24/11 and ran for 30 days, ending ar 23:59:59 EST on February 24th.
The 1st letter ballot failed with 61.81% approval and 14.96% abstaining
We will begin comment resolution this week
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

14. March 2011
PAR Scope and Purpose
Approved PAR Scope: An amendment that defines modifications to both the physical layers (PHY) and the Medium Access Control Layer (MAC), to meet the legal requirements for channel access and coexistence in the TV White Space
Approved PAR Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to allow wireless networks to be used in the TV white space
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

15. March 2011
Purpose, Principles and Vision/Outcome “If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.”*
cbp-and-david-allens-methods
Purpose: the Task Group should create an amendment whose implementation in solutions is likely to receive Regulatory approval for operation in the TV White Spaces under the applicable regulatory rules in the different regulatory domains.
Principles:
The amendment should not duplicate functionality that is being standardized in other Task Groups that are likely to complete before af.
There is no need for backwards compatibility with 2.45 GHz ISM operation.
The starting point is changes to Clauses 17 and 19 and Annexes D and E
Vision/Outcome: Use the OFDM PHYs with 5-, 10- and 20-MHz channel widths to specify the basis for a system that the regulators can approve for operation in the TVWS bands.
* Yogi Berra
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

16. TV Bands Regulatory Requirements
March 2011
TV Bands Regulatory Requirements
These [FCC] rules are primarily intended to ensure the efficient sharing of the TV Bands while protecting incumbent users
The FCC has enabled this band for TVBDs if and only if the licensed users’ interests are protected
We must not interfere
Mitigation of any interference issue should not increase the enforcement requirements for the Commission
There are no formal changes in regulatory status since San Diego
Expected announcement on September 23rd at FCC Open Meeting
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

17. Meeting and Teleconference Minutes
March 2011
Meeting and Teleconference Minutes
Posted Minutes
January Meeting in Los Angeles
af-meeting-minutes-la-january-2011 (posted 29-Jan :33:5916:49)
January Ad Hoc meeting notes
af-11af-january-ad-hoc-notes (Posted 17-Jan :56:34)
February 22nd and March 8th teleconferences
af-february-22nd-teleconference-minutes (posted )
af-march 8th-teleconference-minutes (posted )
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

18. Motion #1 Motion: Moved by: Seconded by: Discussion on the motion?
March 2011
Motion #1
Motion:
To approve the TGaf minutes from the January Interim in Los Angeles, and the January Ad Hoc meeting notes and the February 22nd and March 8th teleconferences in documents 11-11/0214r00, 11-11/0089r0, 11-11/0308r0 and 11-11/03099r0 respectively
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

19. Review of the Results of LB 171
March 2011
Review of the Results of LB 171
The Results
300 eligible people are in this ballot group.     125 affirmative votes    76 negative votes  
  35 abstention votes
===   236  votes received  =  78.7% valid returns                                      =  14.8% valid abstentions
This ballot has met the 50% returned ballot  requirement
This ballot has met the less than 30% abstention requirement
  APPROVAL RATE: 125  affirmative votes       =      62.2 % affirmative   76  total negative votes  =      37.8 % negative
The 75% affirmation requirement has not been met,
Motion fails.
There were 1304 comments received.    
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

20. The Process Divide the comments into categories and form Ad Hocs
March 2011
The Process
Divide the comments into categories and form Ad Hocs
Editorial
PHY
MAC
General
Begin comment resolution
But first…
Andy Gowans (Ofcom) would like to compare our D1.0 with the Ofcom Digital Dividend plan
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

21. Tuesday AM1 and PM3 Agenda
March 2011
Tuesday AM1 and PM3 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Modify and approve the agenda
Administrative items
Reminder and Call for essential patents
Ad hoc group comment resolutions
Recess
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

22. Wednesday PM1and PM2 Agenda
March 2011
Wednesday PM1and PM2 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Modify and approve the agenda
Administrative items
including IEEE IP statement
Ad hoc group comment resolutions
Reassemble to discuss progress
Recess
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

23. Thursday AM1 Agenda Meeting call to order
March 2011
Thursday AM1 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Modify and approve the agenda
Administrative items
Reminder and Call for essential patents
Ad hoc group comment resolutions
Hear helpful (for resolving draft issues) presentation(s)
Adjourn
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

24. Thursday PM2 Agenda Meeting call to order
March 2011
Thursday PM2 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Modify and approve the agenda
Administrative items
Reminder and Call for essential patents
Reassemble and vote on uncontroversial comment resolutions
Plan for teleconferences, May ad hoc and May Interim
Adjourn
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

25. Motion #2 Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
March 2011
Motion #2
Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

26. Motion #3 Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
March 2011
Motion #3
Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

27. Motion #4 Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
March 2011
Motion #4
Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

28. Motion #5 Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
March 2011
Motion #5
Motion: To approve the resolutions in document 11-11/0xxxrx
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

29. Teleconferences Weekly on Tuesdays Time: 22:00 ET for 90 minutes
March 2011
Teleconferences
Weekly on Tuesdays
Time: 22:00 ET for 90 minutes
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

30. TGaf Timeline – Updated July 2010
January 2010
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
March 2011
TGaf Timeline – Updated July 2010
New
Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: January 2011
Re-circulation Working Group Letter Ballot: May 2011
Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: June 2011
Initial Sponsor Ballot: July 2011
Approved Sponsor Ballot: December 2011
Final WG/EC Approval: March 2012
RevCom/Standards Board Approval: March 2012
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Michael Montemurro, RIM

31. Any Other Business? None heard Motion to Adjourn Moved by:
March 2011
Any Other Business?
None heard
Motion to Adjourn
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Vote:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

32. Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
May 2007
doc.: IEEE /0679r2
March 2011
Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
Completed Steps | Future Steps
Adoption of PAR and 5 Criteria
Technical Presentations and Discussions
Specify Any Additional Requirements, Comparison Criteria, or Other Documents
Call For Proposals
Presentation of Proposals
Select from Submitted Complete Proposals to Produce a Draft
Refine Draft
Letter Ballot – January 2011
Recirculation – May 2011
Sponsor Ballot – July 2011
Recirculation – September 2011
Final WG/EC Approval – March 2012
IEEE SB REVCOM Approval – March 2012
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Peter Ecclesine, Cisco Systems

33. 3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
March 2011
3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
Call for Informal Comments
Comment Resolution
WG Letter Ballot
Comment Resolution, Recirculation
Sponsor Ballot
Comment Resolution, Recirculation
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

34. References Go to https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/documents
March 2011
References
Go to
In the box labeled “All Groups”, pull down the menu and select “TGaf”
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion