January2009 IEEE sg-whitespace-09/001r1
Project / IEEE 802Executive Committee on TV White SpaceTitle / Meeting Minutes for 12/30/2008 Teleconference of IEEE 802 Executive Committee TV Whitespaces Study Group
Date Submitted / 2009-01-06
Source / Ranga Reddy
US Army / E-mail:
Re: / []
Abstract / IEEE 802 ECSG on whitespaces meeting minutes from teleconference held on dated 2008-12-30
Purpose / To record minutes from teleconference on 2008-12-30, and provide frame of reference for future discussions
Notice / This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE 802. 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 802
Meeting Minutes for 12/30/2008 Teleconference of
IEEE 802 Executive Committee
Whitespaces Study Group
If you see errors or omissions in these minutes please contact the IEEE 802.WS Chair, Matthew Sherman at .
All meeting documents should be posted to
1Attendance
Participant / AffiliationMatthew Sherman / BAE Systems
Jack Unger / Wireless ISP Assn; Ask-Wi.Com
Yongjin Kim / Qualcomm
Greg Phillips / AirTegrity Wireless, Inc
James Neel / Cognitive Radio Technologies
Steve Shellhammer / Qualcomm
ArthurAstrin / Astrin Radio
K. Sivanesan / Nortel
Gerald Chouinard / Communications Research Centre, Canada
Petter Murray / TMG, Inc.
Baowei Ji / Samsung Telecommunications America
Ed Casas / Intel
Paul Nikolich / YAS, Samsung, HP
Soo-Young Chang / CSUS
Joanna Guenin / Motorola
Md Habibul Islam / Institute for Infocomm Research, Singapore
John Chapin / MIT and SDR Forum
Klaus Fosmark / ?
Prabodh Varshney / Nokia
Ivan Reede / AmneriSys Inc.
J Kim / AT&T
Seiji Yoshida / ?
Pat Carson / ?
Sudhir / ?
Richard Paine / ?
Christine Di Lapi / Motorola Inc.
Scott Blue / ?
Monisha Ghosh / Phillips
Ranga Reddy* / US Army
Marianna Goldhamer* / Alvarion
Maximillian Sandmann* / ?
Nancy Bravin / Self
2Standing Action Items
# / Action / Assignee / Due Date1 / Put together a presentation of cross-802 topic areas that cross multi-802 technologies / M. Sherman / 1/17/09
2 / To try and resolve issue with what format to post documents in to avoid computer program crashes / M. Sherman/R. Reddy / 1/13/09
3 / Secure Secretary of the next teleconference / M. Sherman/R. Reddy / 1/13/09
4 / Secure cross WG attendance credits for 802.11, 802.16, 802.1, and 802.3 / M. Sherman / 1/13/09
5 / Complete process of securing slots at the Wireless Interim for the ECSG to meet / M. Sherman / 1/13/09
6 / Schedule time for Use Case review at next telecon / M. Sherman / 1/13/09
7 / Schedule tentative ad-hoc to discuss what standards can be written to support TV whitespace issues, 12pm ET 1/09/09 / M. Sherman / 1/2/09
3Minutes
3.1Meeting called to order: 13:01
3.2Attendance: 13:02
Instruction: On WebEx, send name and affiliation in chat window, or send email directly to Chair. (This was repeated a couple of times)
3.3Approve or modify agenda: 13:04
No changes suggested. No one objected to approval of the agenda.
3.4Review patent policy: 13:05
The chair asked if anyone had not reviewed the patent policy prior to the call. No one stated that they had not reviewed the policy.
3.5Approve minutes from last teleconference: 13:06
G. Chounaird, noted some problems causing computer program crashes when opening documents that had been posted in various versions of MS Office.
Action Item: [M. Sherman/R. Reddy] to try and resolve issue with what format to post documents to avoid computer program crashes.
Minutes were approved, 13:08 without objection.
3.6Completion of Agenda from 12/16/08 telecon: 13:25
How do we enable coexistence between various 802 technologies?
S. Shellhammer described coexistence issues. One telecom so far to discuss an initial document. Initial document was provided to describe a framework for what coexistence is. 1st of all, what is coexistence? Coexistence, refers to differing networks built to differing IEEE 802 standards. Cooperative and non-cooperative coexistence frameworks discussed. Location awareness and messaging OTA (common PHY) or over the backhaul. Coexistence with non-802 systems is desired, but there are still technical issues that need to be resolved. Several people considered starting a separate PAR for coexistence of 802 devices in whitespaces (proposes a straw poll to resolve) as one recommendation from SG. When poll is still up in the air, most likely after January interim? The Chair suggested runing a straw poll on support for a standard on a common TV Whitespace coexistence protocol on reflector. M. Goldhamer would like to develop coexistence scenarios to explore how coexistence works in standards besides what .22 has done. S. Shellhammer stated that this is a good goal for us within the SG, but there are some other tasks that we recommend after the ECSG concludes its activity. J. Guenin asked how does S. Shellhammer plan to resolve the scope for discussing any follow-on work from the ECSG? Shellhammer says we will have discussion on reflector/telecons and can probably spend time developing a PAR for new coexistence standard. The Chair noted that in the past it has been difficult to get different WG to agree on a common coexistence protocol and noted the current work in 802.11y and 802.16h. I. Reede mentions that some systems are continuous transmission, such that any CSMA/CD like tech will not be able to coexist. G. Chouinard states that common sensing period is needed so that incumbents are not inadvertently hidden, and some info needs to be exchanged between systems to help coexistence (i.e. to facilitate resource sharing). M. Goldhamer, concurs that info is needed. Discussion concluded at 13:25.
3.7Election of Vice Chair: 13:30
Motion: To elect Steve Shellhammer as the TV Whitespace ECSG Vice Chair
Made by:A. Astrin
Seconded by:I. Reede
Note: Nominations closed at last meeting
For:25
Against: 0
Result: Motion carries
3.8Schedule for Teleconferences: 13:55
Motion:To modify the start time of the February 10th, 2009 TV Whitespace ECSG teleconference to 11AM, and for all future meetings after that to alternate between start times of 7PM and 11AM.
Discussion:
I. Reede objected to the idea that someone may bring up issues that were closed or discussed in a previous meeting in a 2nd meeting two weeks later. M. Goldhamer says that for her to attend the meetins that are at 2 AM local time for her is not reasonable and suggested the idea of having a 2 part meeting on the same day (part in the morning ET and part in the evening ET). S. Shellhammer suggests that with 2 meeting schedule, that same items be discussed in the morning/evening sessions. One issue is how are votes to be tabulated in a 2 meeting setup? The Chair noted that for in-person meetings (which includes telecons), 75% majority is still needed but that a vote started in the morning meeting could be left open till the evening. Another issue is that for a two meeting schedule, morning meeting notes have to get out right away to be available for the afternoon. The Chair concurred and noted that future secretaries will be responsible for posting early draft minutes. I. Reede, suggested a 24 hour email notice. The Chair noted that email ballot not allowed in rules. J. Chapin says that EDT no good as time change occurs on 3/09. The chair concurs at adjusts text of new motion to use ET.
Motion modified:
To modify the format of the TV Whitespace ECSG teleconferences as of February 10th, 2009 so that they begin at 11 AM ET, recess at 12:30 PM ET, resume at 7 PM ET, end at 8 PM ET, and allow cumulation of vote tallies on motions across those time slots.
Made By:M. Goldhamer
Seconded:I. Reede
For:24
Against:4
Abstain: 0
Result: Motion carries
3.9Secretary for next meeting
R. Reddy volunteers to be secretary for the next meeting. (In later discussions R. Reddy realized he may not be available for the meeting.)
Action Item: [Chair] Secure a secretary for the next teleconference
3.10Review of prior action items: 14:15
The Chair reviewed status on actions items assigned to him. We are not capturing action items not assigned to others. The Chair would like to record status of action items. (Numbering refers to the minutes of 12/16/08)
Action Item 1: request attendance credit in ECSG for other working groups. Everyone responded in the affirmative except Bruce Kramer. R. Marks was not contacted because 802.16 doesn’t meet with the other wireles groups. The Chair is contacting R. Marks on this issue, because it will come up during March session. P. Nikolich suggested getting 802.1 and 802.3 for inclusion in getting attendance, because those groups may want to weigh on this ec sg (regarding). Status, ongoing.
Action Item 2: request PM1 time slots for Tues/Wed/Thur in LA for ECSG meetings, The slots have been requested but there is no response from the meeting planners yet. It was noted that Chirstina Sahr at IEEE () should be contacted to set up the cross attendance. Status, ongoing
Action Item 3: Can’t do email ballot. This is why voice vote was conducted for vice-chair. Status, closed.
Action Item 4: R. Reddy volunteered to be telecon secretary. Status, ongoing.
Action Item 5: Cannot do email ballot. This is why voice vote was conducted for and future schedule of telecons. Status, closed.
Action Item 6: What are IEEE 802 cross-standard topic areas? The chair is putting a presentation together. He is aware of activities by IEEE SCC41 / P1900 and SDR Forum. But what is the ITU doing? M. Goldhamer mentions Jose Costa is ITU liason, he could help? Also it was mentioned that ITU WP-1B is doing cognitive radio stuff. What’s going in ETSI? M. Goldhamer mentions that ETSI has a “configurable radio” group (TCRRS), and ETSI BRAN is doing some smart detection of radar systems. Neither of these are committed in the cognitive radio direction, but this may change in the future. SCC41 seems like the best bet. The Chair is soliciting info on other groups and any presentations that have been made. EC SP7 (Intelligence and Intersystem Communication), ETSI E2R work sent to SCC 41, and WRC-2011 (agenda item 1.19) could be potential sources of data. ITU for WRC-2011, has an agenda item (1.19), which refers to a resolution from WRC2007 (Coms 6/18 subpoint j) namely the defining of a common pilot channel for cognitive radios. There is also the IEEE technical committee on cognitive networks (TCCN) with R. (Mouli) Chandramouli as Chair. Dr. Chandramouli is with Stevens Institute of Technology (). They do technical articles rather than standards. There is also the Wireless World Research Forum (WWRF) Working Group (WG) 6 that is developing whitepapers relating to cognitive. But these are not concensus standards. Status, ongoing.
3.11Review of progress on core tasks: 14:28
3.11.1 Identify Use Cases of TV White Space Spectrum
N. Vogtli is on vacation. R. Paine has received a few comments.
Action Item: [Matt] Schedule more time for Use Case review prior to interim during the next Teleconference.
3.11.2 Identify what functions may be common across 802 technologies
Still on going. The Chair’s eventual contribution will consider what’s necessary to be standardized to provide for effective TVWS operation. R. Paine mentions that more people need to be involved, and the Chair would like other people to run any ad-hocs to discuss common issues. G. Chouinard suggesting that the “net” that is currently being cast, may be too wide, so any functional requirements should be based on R&O. This means two basic things protecting incumbents (by sensing or a geo-location database), as well as coexistence. The Chair wants too see how TVWS will work on an end-to-end basis, something he feels that the standards groups don’t do enough of. The Chair also mentions that something like security needs to be taken care of, because it is critical for system operation. Matt, would also like to consider network topology. R. Reddy asks, does topology fall into use cases? The Chair wants to scope out the end-to-end system, but only focus IEEE 802 on the lower layer issues. R. Paine suggests that IEEE 802 may want to discuss an architecture.
Action Item: [Matt] Schedule (tentative) ad-hoc to discuss what standards can be written to support TV whitespace issues, at 12pm et 1/09/09.
3.11.3 Assess impact of FCC White Space R&O on IEEE 802 activities
Use cases ad-hoc have develop use cases on power-requirements in FCC R&O, but foreign market requirements have yet to be defined. .22’s comments are 334r3 (in .22’s mentor folder). M. Goldhamer brings desire for other groups to follow .22’s discussion on response to FCC R&O. FCC R&O not yet published in public register. Will be published once errata on the R&O are made available. Once FCC R&O published, then comment period will start.
3.12Open Floor Discussions:
No time was available for open floor discussions
Meeting was adjourned at 14:36
SubmissionPage 1Ranga Reddy, US Army