September 2007 doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/0547r9
IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs
Date: 2007-09-06
Author(s):
Name / Company / Address / Phone / email
Stephen J. Shellhammer / Qualcomm, Inc. / 5775 Morehouse Drive
San Diego, CA 92121 / (858) 658-1874 /
1 Conference Call Times
Date / Start Time / End TimeAugust 9 / 11 AM Eastern Time / 12 PM Eastern Time
August 23 / 11 AM Eastern Time / 12 PM Eastern Time
September 6 / 11 AM Eastern Time / 12 PM Eastern Time
2 Attendance
Participant / August 9 / August 23 / Sept 6Douglas Chan
Amir Ghasemi / X / X
Mariana Goldhammer / X / X / X
Shahar Hauzner / X
Paul Piggin / X / X / X
Bruce Kramer / X
Dan Lubar
Shlomo Malka
Nat Natarajan
Ziv Nuss / X
Eldad Perahia / X / X / X
Aryan Saed / X
Steve Shellhammer / X / X / X
Kathy Sohrabi / X / X / X
Ken Stanwood / X
Adrian Stephens
John Sydor
Darcy Swain
Steve Whitesell
Ariton Xhafa
3 Minutes from March 29 2007 Conference Call
3.1 Agenda
· Attendance (Steve)
· Discuss presentation 802.16h-07/38r1 from Paul Piggin
· New Business
3.2 Notes
· 802.16 bandwidths of 5, 10, 20 MHz are available
· 802.16 power has not yet been set, will be set to max value permitted in the band
· 802.16 is a 5 ms frame duration
· The 802.11y link budget parameters need to be defined
· The 802.11 contention window parameters are given in 11e
· In simulation the bandwidth are such that there are four channels for 11y and 16h
· Assume omni-directional antenna for 11y and 16h BS and stations
· The channels were assigned by considering all the base stations (11y and 16h) and picking the best channel by optimizing the SIR. This is a global optimization assuming coordination between 11y and 16h
· It was pointed out that the 802.11 MAC is more complex than the model being used in this simulation
· Need to include RTS/CTS and link adaptation
· Stanford university (SUI) propagation model
· Build a document with simulation parameters assumptions (Paul to start that document, others to contribute)
· John and Amir will present next time
Action Item / OwnerStart a document on simulation parameters / Paul Piggin
Present at the next conference call / John Sydor and Amir Ghasemi
4 Minutes from April 12 2007 Conference Call
4.1 Agenda
· Attendance (Steve)
· Discuss presentation S802.16h-07/17r1 by Amir Ghasemi and John Sydor
· Discuss document 802.19-07/11r0 by Paul Piggin
· New Business
4.2 Notes
· Amir gave the presentation on simulation of 11y/16h under three conditions
- Baseline
- LBT in 16h
- EQP in 16h
· Results show that if there are no hidden nodes that LBT works well and EQP work okay.
· Mariana suggested to add a fragmentation to 11y model
· Paul reviewed his document on simulation parameters. We agreed to work on this document so we have a common set of simulation parameters
· Eldad sent out the following two 802.16 documents
- 802.16.3c-01/29
- 802.16.3c-01/53
· Several people are unable to make the April 26 call so we may switch it to May 3
· The next available time for a face-to-face meeting will be the July Plenary session
5 Minutes from May 3 2007 Conference Call
5.1 Agenda
· Attendance (Steve)
· Interference between systems sharing spectrum in 3.65GHz (Mariana Goldhamer)
· An update on simulations including changes due to 11e amendment (Paul Piggin)
· New Business
5.2 Notes
· Mariana reviewed document C80216h-07/39r1
· There was some discussion about the adjacent channel interference. It would be useful to review the adjacent channel interference analysis
· Paul presented document S80216h-07/50r0 which describes updates to the simulation Paul is developing. The updates include more accurate models of 802.11 MAC
· Action Item – See if we can obtain from Peter Ecclesine a reference on statistics of packet sizes
· Steve will be giving a presentation on CCA-ED in 802.11y at the Montreal meeting. He will distribute the presentation to members of these calls.
· Other items for the Montreal meeting would be to review some of these presentations and prepare any feedback for the authors
6 Minutes from May 31 2007 Conference Call
6.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Presentation on Clear Channel Assessment Energy Detection (CCA-ED) in 802.11y which evaluates CCA-ED in 802.11y with nearby 802.16h (Steve)
· http://ieee802.org/19/pub/2007/19-07-0010-01-0000-CCA-ED-in-802.11y.ppt
· New business
6.2 Notes
· Everyone was familiar with the IEEE patent policy
· Steve presented document 802.19-07/0010r1 on CCA-ED in 802.11y
· We had a discussion on the interpretation of the 4 ms in 11y. Eldad reviewed the 11y draft while on the call. We probably need to review it off-line and confirm the interpretation for CCA-ED
· Steve needs to modify the threshold so to get 90% PD at the specified signal power
· Eldad suggested that Steve consider the effect of the single parity bit in 11a (hence also 11y) on CCA-CS which is also running in parallel with CCA-ED
7 Minutes from June 14 2007 Conference Call
7.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Review simulation parameters document (Paul Piggin)
· http://ieee802.org/19/pub/2007/19-07-0011-01-0000-Parameters-for-Simulation.doc
· New business
7.2 Notes
· Everyone was familiar with the IEEE patent policy
· Paul presented document 802.19-07/11r1 on simulation parameters
· We discussed what value should be used for shadow fading
· The document on the SUI model discusses shadow fading
· It was suggested a shadow fading margin of 6 dB (90% area coverage probability assuming an 8 dB shadow fading standard deviation
· For the shadow fading we need to also consider the CCA sensing link and the interference link
- One approach is to pick the shadow fading value randomly between stations and then keep them fixed for those locations
- On each experiment the shadow fading is fixed between stations are fixed at the beginning of the experiment since during the experiment the station locations do not change
· Put the fixed clients at 10 meters high
· The SUI model is for outdoor operation
· When going outdoor to indoor
- Add building penetration loss
- Possibly increase the shadow fading standard deviation
· Add a description of various scenarios. Make the other parameters dependent on the scenario
· Should consider TX and RX diversity for 16h
· Need to review the receiver sensitivity values for 11y
· Steve will schedule Wednesday afternoon for the 802.19 meeting in San Francisco for this topic
· Paul will update his document and send out an update to be reviewed on the next call
8 Minutes from June 28 2007 Conference Call
8.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Review simulation parameters document (Paul Piggin)
· http://ieee802.org/19/pub/2007/19-07-0011-01-0000-Parameters-for-Simulation.doc
· New business
8.2 Notes
· Everyone was familiar with the IEEE patent policy.
· Paul presented document 802.19-07/11r2 on simulation parameters. Paul hoped to go through the document and take some direction from the group on the TBDs and question marks within the draft. The aim is to have the document in good shape for the San Francisco plenary and for the document to be at a stage for approval.
· Discussion of the scenarios: There was a question about the registration of devices used in the indoor scenario. For this scenario what are the assumptions about the max. EIRP. This needs further understanding.
· It was suggested that the 802.11n indoor propagation model be used for indoor scenarios. Eldad cited 11_03_0940_04 as the reference document. This is for 2.4 GHz and 5.8GHz.
· It was expressed that the indoor base station antenna gain may be in the order of 0dBi, i.e. not the same as the outdoor one expressed as 10dBi.
· Eldad stated that a possible further direction for the scenarios was to rank them in order of importance. This importance would be derived from member contribution and which scenarios were believed to be of most value.
· There was some discussion on the diversity gain for multiple antenna systems. This could be represented in the Fade Margin values. The SUI model is to be reviewed for any suitable recommendations.
· Mariana provided some input on possible modifications to the fixed, portable, and mobile antenna gains, and the cabling losses. In some cases the cabling loss may be a connector loss.
· Eldad pointed out that the 802.11y medium access timing values were default and from the standard and represented an indoor propagation scenario. It was noted that subclause 7.3.2.9 in the 802.11 standard provided instruction on how these timings could be modified for other deployment scenarios.
· Paul Piggin to develop an 11r3 document based on comments received on the call and action items undertaken before the next call.
· Based on the feedback from those present on the call it was decided that a call for Thursday 12 July would be of benefit and help ahead of the San Francisco plenary meeting.
· There was no new business.
9 Minutes from July 12 2007 Conference Call
9.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Review simulation parameters document 802.19-07/11r3 (Paul Piggin)
· Discuss plans for San Francisco
· New business
9.2 Notes
· Everyone was familiar with the IEEE patent policy
· Goals for this activity
- Agree on simulation parameters
- Review simulations
- Validate 16h design parameters
· Paul presented document 802.19-07/11r3 on simulation parameters
- We reviewed the open items in the document
- We will resolve those items in San Francisco
- We also discussed that we need to agree on what coexistence metrics we should use
- Review email from Peter Ecclesine on traffic model distribution
- Pick several traffic models to choose from
10 Minutes from August 9 2007 Conference Call
10.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Review simulation parameters document 802.19-07/11r5 (Paul Piggin)
· Discuss plans for San Francisco
· Status of other action items
o Simple link adaptation algorithm
o Set of coexistence metrics for this scenario (Steve)
· New business
10.2 Notes
· Paul summarized his new document
· We discussed antenna patterns
· Paul to send out a link to the WiMAX reference
· The simulations will not include TPC in 802.11y
· The air propagation times have been revised
· Marianna pointed out that the link budget includes losses and receiver sensitivity. She thinks the sensitivity includes these losses
· Marianna pointed out that the document must specify the number of sub-carriers for each CPE
· Marianna will email out the comments in detail
· Aryan Saed briefly reviewed his document on link adaptation. We will review it in more detail on the next conference call
11 Minutes from August 23 2007 Conference Call
11.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Discuss comments from Marianna on simulation parameter documents (Paul)
· Discussion on simulation parameter document 802.19-07/0011r6 (Paul)
· Simple link adaptation algorithm (Aryan Saed)
· Set of coexistence metrics for this scenario (Steve)
· New business
11.2 Notes
· Paul addressed issues in his notes, the minutes, email from Marianna
· Paul accepted all of Marianna’s first set of comments.
· Paul will look at Marianna’s next comment on Coordinated Contention-Based Protocol (CXCBP) [1], clause 15.4.2.1.3 – C)
· Eldad pointed out that all the 11y devices will implement quiet periods for radar detection for DFS (spectrum management flag is set to True)
· Eldad to send out details on quiet periods in Spectrum Management
· Marianna will send out some information CXCBP to be included into Paul’s simulation document
· Marianna stated that the algorithm in the link adaptation modifies the MCS too quickly
· Eldad pointed out that we should not mandate the link adaptation used in the simulation
· Paul to put in some text on what simulation parameters are more flexible
· Paul to add the fixed MCS as a link adaptation algorithm
· Marianna pointed out that we need a required SNR for each MCS in 802.11y
· Eldad pointed we can convert from receiver sensitivity to SNR by using the assumed 10 dB noise figure (in 802.11a standard). Includes a 5 dB implementation loss.
· Marianna pointed out we need to consider the OFDMA in 802.16h
· We need to include a traffic model for data (current model only includes VoIP)
· Marianna will send out a link to a 3GPP2 document on traffic models
12 Minutes from September 6 2007 Conference Call
12.1 Agenda
· Attendance
· Check to see if anyone is not familiar with the IEEE patent policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf
· Discussion on simulation parameter document 802.19-07/0011r7 (Paul)
· Set of coexistence metrics for this scenario 802.19-07/0020r0 (Steve)
· Simple link adaptation algorithm (Aryan Saed)
· New business
12.2 Notes
· Paul described structural changes to the document
· Mariana described the new material describing the Coordinated Contention Based Protocol
· Paul asked about a potential synchronization drift between the 11y and 16h networks, due to the fact that the 11y and 16h periods are not divisible to one another
· Bruce raised a concern about synchronizing multiple 11y networks with 16h
· Mariana discussed that in this band there will be operator cooperation