1. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 1 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Adopted Proposals from May 18,2005 TG4a AM1] Date Submitted: [24 May, 2005] Source: [Vern Brethour] Company [Time Domain Corp.] Address [7057 Old Madison Pike; Suite 250; Huntsville, Alabama 35806; USA] Voice:[(256) 428-6331], FAX: [(256) 922-0387], E-Mail: [vern.brethour@timedomain.com] Re: [802.15 4a.] Abstract:[Classes of service, Ranging protocols and SOP targets for 802.15.4a] Purpose:[To document the proposals adopted in the session.] Notice:This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. 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 acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.

2. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 2 This is after-the-fact documentation of the adopted items in the Cairns May 18-AM1 session. The bandwidth and document server support was so horrible in Cairns that it was not possible to post this during the meeting. The next 6 slides which follow this cover slide are exactly the slides projected on the screen at the Wednesday May 18, 2005 AM1 session. The proposals on these slides were adopted by unanimous consent. Immediately after adoption in Cairns, the original.ppt file was transferred to the laptops of the sectary and the chair by thumb drive for incorporation into the minutes. However, in the first draft of the minutes, “MS_word” mangled the incorporation of the slides. The original slides are presented here in their native “.ppt” format.

3. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 3 Device ADevice B Two equations in two unknowns yield: * US Naval Observatory, Telstar Satellite, circa 1962 http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/time/twoway.htm Unmatched detect-delays in the two devices may require one-time offset calibration. Unknown propagation delay Unknown clock offset Message 1 Message 2 Multiple measurements of t p and t o yield finer precision & accuracy, and allow frequency offset correction. Ranging Protocols: We want them All !!! Key: Sync Pulse Location Pulse TDOA backhaul Mode 2 - Active controller reference node SOI Key: Sync Pulse Location Pulse Position Report Mode 1 - Passive controller reference node SOI Two way Ranging One way SOI does TxOne way SOI does Rx

4. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 4 We have general consensus favoring use of a Homogenous Preamble for Acquisition and Ranging. Data (to include the time stamp of when the delimiter was at the antenna of the transmitter. Homogeneous preamble signal 4 ms 50 meter ranging 500 us 20 meter Ranging 75 meter communications 50 us 30 meter communications

5. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 5 Sharing (Ranging and Communications) the same Preamble leads us to a unified notion of “Classes of Service” We can express this newer construct using the “Classification based on index parameters” similar to the way Yihong Qi organized IEEE 15-05-0275-00-004a

6. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 6 15.4a Classes of Service (Not just about Ranging anymore) Coherent receiver Non-Coherent receiver Ranging to 25CM @ 50 m Not appropriate for communications Ranging to 25CM @ 20 m Communications to 75 meters Not appropriate for Ranging ? Communications to 30 meters Ranging to 1M @ 10 m communications to 30 m Not appropriate for Ranging communications to 10 m Not appropriate for Ranging Not appropriate for communications ? Short preamble Long preamble Medium preamble (4ms nominal) (500us nominal)(50us nominal)

7. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 7 Overlaying the performance targets for distance and resolution, we have SOP targets. Informal discussions are leaning toward supporting 6 SOPs. That is achievable as 2 code isolated piconets in each of 3 frequency isolated bands. More would be great, but this seems like a reasonable target.

8. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 8 Remaining work: For ranging, it’s the signaling strategy in the homogenous header. For general UWB, it’s the bandplan together with the signaling.

9. doc.: IEEE 802.15-05-0319-00-004a Submission May, 2005 Brethour, Time DomainSlide 9 Summary Slide for this submission (This slide was added after the fact – not shown in Cairns) What exactly did we decide on May 18, AM1? 1.802.15.4a will support 3 ranging protocols (slide 3). 2.802.15.4a will use a homogenous preamble to support both acquisition and ranging (slide 4). 3.802.15.4a will use 3 preamble lengths. The word “nominal” was added to qualify the time lengths (slide 4). 4.With 3 preamble lengths and 2 receiver types, 802.15.4a will support 6 classes of service (slide 6). 5.802.15.4a signaling and bandplan will support at least 6 SOPs (slide 7).