November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

WG11 Comments on 802-22 PARs submitted Nov 2009

Date: 2009-11-17

Authors:Name Affiliations Address Phone email Jon Rosdahl CSR Highland, UT +1-801-492-4023 jrosdahl@ieee.org

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

Abstract

This Submission contains the comments to 802.22 on the two PARs that are under consideration for the November Plenary.

There was a motion to forward these comments to 802.22, each motion passed 12-0-0 for sending these comments from 802.11.

There are 2 sets of comments, one for each PAR.

802.22 slides 3-7

802.22.3 slides 8-11

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22 PAR modification to clarifying scope, PAR and 5C

• Item 1: Doc 11-09/1105r1 – submission that has some discussion on the rational for changing the scope.

• Item 2: Problem: Dates for completion are not realistic. The dates need to be corrected (we suggest that the dates of Start Sponsor 12-2012 and RevCom 12-2013 would be more realistic/acceptable.)

• Item 3: the form presented was not the correct PAR form. The PAR modification form should be used.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22 (2)

• 5.1 Scope: This standard specifies the air interface, including the cognitive medium access control layer (MAC) and physical layer (PHY), of point-to-multipoint wireless regional area networks comprised of a professional fixed base station with fixed and portable user terminals operating in the VHF/UHF TV broadcast bands between 54 MHz and 862 MHz.– Issue 4: “professional fixed base station” should be

“professionally installed fixed base station” – (insert the word “installed”)

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22 (3)• 8.1 other comments:

– Issue 5: Remove the following text as it is no longer necessary/needed from the end of the first paragraph:• “The IEEE 802.18 Study Group chartered to develop this PAR does not

believe that any existing IEEE 802 PHY/MAC combination can meet these requirements without extensive modifications. The Study Group has therefore concluded that placing the project in a new WorkingGroup is the most efficient approach..”

• 5c: Distinct Identity A– Issue 6: This text fails to distinguish among 802.16h, which will

be an approved amendment in early 2010, and 802.22 and the efforts proposed in the 802.22.3 PAR. Add distinctions between each of the three. Be aware that 802.16h clause 6.3.2.3.86 does report DTV, wireless microphones and other licensed users.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22 (4)

• 5C Technical Feasibility –

– Issue 7: There is no experience of WLAN devices operating under the control of fixed outdoor devices reliably, and indeed the question of reliable operation without common control is an issue in every unlicensed band.

• 5C Economic Feasibility –

– Issue 8: Not all devices are autonomous, indeed the FCC ruling requires that Master Devices contact the TV bands database before any transmission is allowed. Change this text to include operation with a TV bands database.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22 (5)

• 2.1 Title:

• Information Technology -Telecommunications and information exchange between systems – Wireless Regional Area Networks (WRAN) - Specific requirements - Part 22: Cognitive Wireless RAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications: Policies and procedures for operation in the TV Bands

– Issue 9: The Title is in properly formed. Prior to the “Part 22” it is should be the consistent boilerplate that all 802 Standards have. Then after the “Part 22” it should have what designates this to the 22WG and then the specific title part for the covered technology

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22.3 new standard for scalable WRAN operations, PAR and 5C

• 11-09/1106 discusses possible issues with the PAR and 5C.• 2.1 Title of Standard: Cognitive Medium Access Control (MAC)

and Physical Layer (PHY) specifications: Policies and procedures for Scalable operations of Wireless Regional Area Networks (WRAN) in the TV Bands.

– Issue 1: delete “Policies and procedures for “ from the title. This is a standard for…

– Issue 2: The full title is not listed in the PAR form.. It should have the Boiler Plate from 802 followed by “Part 22” followed by the designation that this is for the “WRAN..” and then the specific designation of what is being covered.

– Issue 3: the title for 802.22.3 should be Distinct and yet consistent with the 802/802.22 family of titles.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22.3 (2)

• 8.1 Notes:– Issue 4: Remove the following text “Item Number: 5.5 (Need for

the Project):The IEEE 802.22.3 standard is intended to be integrated to IEEE 802.22 standard.

This may be more correctly included in 5.5.

• 5C Distinct Identity: a) Substantially different from other IEEE 802 standards. Table

– Issue 5: Page 8 of 11-09-1106r0 shows several errors in the table and in the explanation notes.• Please correct as noted in 11-09/1106r0.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

802.22.3 (3)

• Technical Feasibility– Issue 6 : the statements are very broad, and in some cases not accurate…”

Existing 802 wireless standards in other bands (e.g. 802.11h) have demonstrated that detection and avoidance of operation in spectrum occupied by licensed  users is technically feasible.”

The 802.11h does not do detect and avoid (DAA) it only specified DFS and TPC.

–  Issue 7: The statements should address the “demonstrated” technology that show the technical feasibility.

– Issue 8: The addition of “Scalable” as the main focus, should be addressed in the 5C to show the distinct difference from the base 22 standard.

– Issue 9 (to be renumbered as #1): If 802.22.3 is an extension of 802.22, and creating a “Scalable” extension of the standard, then this should be an amendment. The Amendment should be created after the standard is approved to allow a consistent target for the amendment to modify.

November 2009

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802.11-09/1220r0

Submission

References

• https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/09/11-09-1197-00-0000-review-802-pars-underconsideration-for-nov-plenary.ppt