1. Discussion on The EHT Timeline and PAR Definition
Month Year
doc.: IEEE /1938r0
November 2018
Discussion on The EHT Timeline and PAR Definition
Date:
Authors:
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
John Doe, Some Company

2. May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Abstract
In this contribution, we propose a number of procedural improvements that are likely to speed up the EHT timeline as well as provide inputs on the drafting of the EHT PAR.
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

3. May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Introduction
Several standard development approaches have been discussed for EHT in the WNG and in the EHT TIG/SG [1][2][3][4]
Some proposals suggest to have the EHT TG operate in one or more waves/phases, with each wave/phase having a limited set of features defined in the PAR, out of concern for standard development cycles being too long
Other proposals suggest that a fast standard development process with a limited feature set may not provide enough time for major feature development, or may not include sufficient customer feedback
We propose a number of procedure improvements for EHT, which led by Chair and supported by the group , should shorten the standard development cycle
In addition, we provide our views on the definition of the scope of the EHT PAR
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

4. Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (1/5)
November 2018
doc.: IEEE /1938r0
November 2018
Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (1/5)
In order to speed up EHT development, it is important to improve the process and communications among the TG members to foster faster convergence of features and designs. Better communication and processes should provide:
Better understanding of proposals
Better understanding of concerns regarding proposals
Objective evaluation of proposals
Several improvements in procedures may, among others, improve communication and the process:
Early contribution submissions
Better utilization of the reflector as a discussion platform
More frequent teleconference discussions
Simulation calibration and objective evaluation of new proposals
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

5. Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (2/5)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (2/5)
Early contribution submissions
Currently contributions are often uploaded to Mentor right before the presentation is made
This often results in TG members not being able to evaluate the proposals and the rejection of the idea pending further study, and hence leads to lost time and delays
Some examples of possible procedural requirements:
Contributions available 1 week prior to F2F meetings, updates allowed during the meeting;
Contributions available 48 hours prior to a teleconference
(InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

6. Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (3/5)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (3/5)
Better utilization of the reflector as a communication tool
Technical discussions are currently often conducted using private exchanges
Non-public discussions leads to many of the TG members not being aware of the development or discussions and this may cause more delay in reaching TG consensus on certain topics
Open technical discussions of draft contributions and proposal should be discussed on the reflector as much as possible
Open discussions on TG reflectors should lead to faster TG consensus
Additional public subgroups can be organized to focus discussions
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

7. Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (4/5)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (4/5)
More frequent teleconference discussions
Teleconferences should be used more frequently throughout the development process
e.g., in a SG or at the earlier stages of a TG, teleconferences can provide opportunities for more verbal debate to focus the direction of the group
Teleconferences should augment the reflector discussions, allowing ideas to be clarified/reach consensus prior to the F2F meetings
More frequent teleconferences should lead to a faster convergence of a feature set; it may also speed up feature design and CR, in lieu of, or in addition to ad hoc meetings
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

8. Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (5/5)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Procedural Changes to Speed Up EHT Timeline (5/5)
Simulation calibration and objective evaluation of new proposals
Simulation calibration/studies are currently done in TGs, but are not always used to evaluate proposals, or when deciding which features or techniques should be included
Subjective arguments may often lead to long discussions and delays in spec development
Use of consistent criteria based on calibrated simulation results should speed up the process, can ensure fairness and openness of the development process, and will enable participants to act as individual experts making decisions based on technical criteria
To support this process, a well defined set of goals/system requirements are required; these could be included in the PAR, or in a functional requirements document
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

9. Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (1/3)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (1/3)
A well defined set of goals/system requirements for EHT should be defined
The PAR scope should include a high level description of requirements/goals for the EHT TG
These requirements/goals should be measurable (via simulation or analysis)
The input to the goals and system requirements may be from agreed use cases and market needs
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

10. Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (2/3)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (2/3)
Making a decision on set of features may be premature at this point
PAR scope should include measurable high level system requirements that are desired for EHT devices
Currently, the EHT SG has not come to consensus on measurable, high level system requirements
The following primary objectives for EHT SG have been agreed [5]:
To increase peak throughput and improve efficiency
To support high throughput and low latency applications such as video-over-WLAN, gaming, AR and VR
These requirements are not detailed enough to clearly define the goals of a TG
Without clear consensus on the system requirements, fair and objective feature evaluation and selection are difficult to achieve, e.g., due to some of the following questions
Is one feature better than the other?
Why would one design of a feature be selected out of a set of designs that can achieve the same system requirement?
Is the feature desirable for EHT devices?
Feature discussion should be initiated after setting the overall system requirements
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

11. Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (3/3)
May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Views on the EHT PAR Scope Definition (3/3)
We propose the following direction for the PAR scope definition:
The PAR scope should include high level system requirements/goals that are measurable:
Examples may include: peak throughput, system efficiency improvement, latency, etc.
A list of features may be included as examples that may satisfy the high level system requirements/goals
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

12. May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
Conclusion
In this contribution, we discussed a number of procedural changes that can help with speeding up the EHT timeline, e.g.,
Early contribution submissions
Better utilization of the reflector as a discussion platform
More frequent teleconference discussions
Simulation calibration and objective evaluation of new proposals
Our view is that the PAR scope should include system requirements and goals for EHT
System requirements/goals should include peak performance, latency, etc.
The EHT PAR scope should not restrict features or dictate that certain features have already been selected.
Features should be selected based on thorough and objective evaluation of how the feature will enable the requirements/goals to be met.
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)

13. May 2018
doc.: IEEE /1065r1
November 2018
References
[1] IEEE /0789r9 Extreme Throughput (XT) , May 2018
[2] IEEE /0846r2 Next Generation PHY/MAC in Sub-7GHz, May 2018
[3] IEEE /1550r0 Recommended Development Process, Sept. 2018
[4] IEEE /1116r0 Distributed MU-MIMO and HARQ Support for EHT, July 2018
[5] IEEE /1263r0 EHT Subgroup Formation Motion, July 2018
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)
Kome Oteri (InterDigital)