doc.: ieee 802.11-15/430 march 2015 tgax mu ad-hoc groupslide 1 tgax mu ad-hoc march 2015 agenda...

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430March 2015

TGax MU ad-hoc groupSlide 1

TGax MU ad-hoc March 2015 Agenda Date: 2015-03-11

Name Affiliation Address Phone email Sigurd Schelstraete Quantenna

Communications 3450 W. Warren Ave Fremont, CA 94538

[email protected]

Kaushik Josiam Samsung Electronics

1301 E. Lookout Dr Richardson TX 75082

[email protected]

Kiseon Ryu LG Electronics 19, Yangjae-daero 11gil, Seocho-gu, Seoul 137-130, Korea

[email protected]

Authors:

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430December 2014

TGax MU ad-hoc groupSlide 2Slide 2

Meeting Protocol

• Please announce your affiliation when you first address the group during a meeting slot


TGax MU ad-hoc groupSlide 3Slide 3

Attendance• https://murphy.events.ieee.org/imat/attendance/index

1. Register

2. Indicate attendance

See document 11-09-0517r0 for more details

https://murphy.events.ieee.org/imat/attendance/index

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430March 2015

Agenda for Wednesday March 11, 08:00 – 10:00

• Call meeting to order • Patent policy, etc.• Ad-hoc group Straw poll rules• Set and approve agenda• Presentations• Adjourn




Participants, Patents, and Duty to InformAll 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

Slide #1



Patent Related LinksAll 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 Bylawshttp://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manualhttp://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3

Material about the patent policy is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-material.html

Slide #2

If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at [email protected] or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html

This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt



Call for Potentially Essential Patents

• 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

Slide #3



Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings

• 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 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for

more details.

Slide #4

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

• A straw poll needs to achieves at least 75% at the ad-hoc level to be converted to a motion at the TG level.

• In the case a consensus can not be reached within an Ad Hoc group (a stalemate that prohibits further progress), the subject is moved to the Task group, if an Ad Hoc straw poll vote to move the subject to the Taskgroup achieves >50% approval.

• A straw poll affecting the Spec Framework has to start with, – Do you agree to add to the TG Specification Frame work document?– x.y.z. <feature description>

• For further details, please see 11-15-0075r0

Ad-hoc Group Straw poll rules

March 2015


doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

Submissions (MU)

March 2015

Osama Aboul-Magd (Huawei Technologies)

Slide 10

DCN Title Author11-15/0331 Uplink Multi-User MIMO Protocol Design Yongho Seok (NEWRACOM)11-15/0333 Throughput Comparison of Some Multi-user Schemes in 802.11ax Kome Oteri (InterDigital)11-15/0363 UL MU Synchronization Requirements Yonggang Fang (ZTE)11-15/0353 OFDMA Non-contiguous Channel Utilization Jinsoo Ahn (Yonsei univ.)11-15/0354 Bandwidth granularity on UL-OFDMA data allocation Yonsei Univ.11-15/0384 Discussion on DL-OFDMA Sub-channel Indication Method Yu Cai (Lenovo)11-15/0379 DL OFDMA Performance and ACK Aggregation Reza Hedayat (Newracom)11-15/0336 MAC Overhead Analysis of MU Transmissions Xiaofei WANG (InterDigital)11-15/0377 Considerations on UL MU Resource Scheduling Leonardo Lanante (Kyutech)

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

Jinsoo Ahn, Yonsei UniversitySlide 11

MU Straw Poll #1

• Do you agree to add the following to the TG Specification Frame work document?– 3.y.z The amendment shall define a mechanism to support non-

contiguous channel transmission.

• Y/N/A: 34/0/44• Straw poll meets 75%

doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

MU Straw Poll #2

• Do you agree to add the following to the TG Specification Framework document?– x.y.z. HE-PPDU for UL-OFDMA shall support UL data

transmission below 20MHz for an HE STA

• Y/N/A: 11/0/many• Straw poll meets 75%

December 2014


doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

MU Straw Poll #3

• Do you agree to add the following to the TG specification framework document:– X.y.z Requirement of Carrier Frequency Accuracy

• For 5GHz band, the accuracy of transmit carrier frequency of STA (and AP) that support UL MU shall be within ±N1 ppm (TBD).

• For 2.4GHz band, the accuracy of transmit carrier frequency of STA (and AP) that support UL MU shall be within ±N2 ppm (TBD).

• Y/N/A: 4/9/43• Straw poll doesn’t meet 75%

December 2014


doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

MU Straw Poll #4

• Do you agree to add the following to the TG specification framework document:– X.y.z Requirement of Carrier Frequency Synchronization

• For 5GHz band, the carrier frequency synchronization error between the carrier frequency of STA and the carrier frequency of signal received from the AP shall not exceed ±N3 ppm (TBD) T1 (TBD) usec time after the start of the PPDU.

• For 2.4GHz band, the carrier frequency synchronization error between the carrier frequency of STA and the carrier frequency of signal received from the AP shall be within ±N4 ppm (TBD) T2 (TBD) usec time after the start of the PPDU.

• Y/N/A: 7/13/many • Straw poll doesn’t meet 75%

December 2014


doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

MU Straw Poll #5

• Do you agree to add the following to the TG specification framework document:

– X.y.z Timing Synchronization Requirement • The symbol timing synchronization between the transmit

symbol boundary of STA and the received symbol boundary from the AP shall be aligned within M ns (TBD) for a given CP length.

• Y/N/A: 6/14/Many• Straw poll doesn’t meet 75%

December 2014


doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/430

• Do you agree that TGax should support a resource block sharing as defined in slide 10?

• Y/N/A: 6/10/Many

MU Straw Poll #6

March 2015

Sigurd SchelstraeteSlide 16

doc.: ieee 802.11-15/430 march 2015 tgax mu ad-hoc groupslide 1 tgax mu ad-hoc march 2015 agenda...

Documents