April 2011 doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0569r0
IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs
Date: 2011-04-25
Author(s):
Name / Affiliation / Address / Phone / email
Jae-Hyung Song / LG Electronics / 221, Yangjae-Dong,
Seocho-Gu, Seoul, Korea / +82-10-2388-0915 /
April 11, 2011 (Monday) PM 9:30 – 11:00, EDT
Notes – Monday, April 11th, 2011;
1. Dave Halasz (representing Aclara) is the chair of the TGah and was running this session. Chair called meeting to order: 9:31pm, EDT.
2. Secretary: Jae-Hyung Song (LG Electronics).
3. Administrative items
3.1. Chair Halasz reviewed the administrative items and presented the links for accessing the related documents.
3.2. Chair Halasz reviewed the patent policy and meeting guideline. Chair asked: “Are there any questions?” None heard.
3.3. Chair Halasz asked: “Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of that standard?” None heard.
3.4. Chair Halasz reviewed other guide lines of the IEEE WG meetings.
4. The proposed agenda of the teleconference, which was circulated through the TGah email reflector, was reviewed. The agenda contained:
4.1. IPR and other relevant IEEE policies
4.2. Agenda for April 11th conference call
4.3. Channel model discussion led by Jim Lansford
4.4. Usage, Requirements and Specification framework discussions/submissions
The proposed agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
5. Channel model discussion led by Jim Lansford (CSR)
5.1. Skeleton submission review (11-11/0498r0, Channel Models for TGah)
5.1.1. Ad-hoc chair Lansford stated that he didn’t have a time to update the document. However, he stated that there are volunteers to formulate section 3 based on LTE and .11n channel models. He also stated that he is planning to include performance numbers per use case.
5.1.2. Chair Halasz suggested reviewing channel model submissions from March meeting for applicability. Ad-hoc chair Lansford responded that since the documents are already up, there is no need to rehash them.
5.2. Discussion
5.2.1. A participant asked what kind of use cases that the group needs for the indoor to outdoor channel model. Ad-hoc chair Lansford responded that offloading use case would need the indoor to outdoor channel model.
5.2.2. A participant commented that since there is a large variation in available frequency bands, as well as the diversity of use cases, the group should focus on one or two channel models.
5.2.3. A participant commented that the group only needs some modifications to the LTE channel model, ad-hoc chair Lansford responded that he will post a more refined version of the document so that the channel model discussion can move forward.
5.2.4. A participant queried the progress of channel modeling effort in India, ad-hoc chair Lansford responded that there is no official comment heard yet.
6. Usage, Requirements and Specification framework discussion/submissions
6.1. Requirements discussion (11-11/0527r0, Dave Halasz – Aclara)
6.1.1. The submission contains some suggestions on the set of mandatory frequency band (as 920 – 928 MHz for the U.S.), range requirement (2km), coexistence with 802.15.4 and 802.15.4g, and the number of associations (more than 2007).
6.1.2. Discussion on the submission
6.1.2.1. A participant commented that if 2km range requirement makes any changes to the transmission system. The author responded that the requirement itself needs a clarification.
6.1.2.2. A participant commented that another possible requirement would be interoperability with TGaf, but the author responded that PAR of TGah excludes the TV band.
6.1.2.3. A participant asked for the clarification in the term “coexistence”. The author responded that it means .11 WLAN user experience along with compatibility with .11i/w/s/k/v and no 802.1 architectural changes.
6.1.2.4. The author commented that the number of associations should be determined by the future MAC ad-hoc.
6.2. Discussion for TGah functional requirements (11-11/0528r0, Minho Cheong – ETRI)
6.2.1. The functional requirements ad-hoc chair Cheong went through the submission, which contains discussion topics for the function requirements document.
6.2.2. Discussion on the submission
6.2.2.1. There was a discussion on the coexistence and there was a comment that the coexistence is hard to achieve without performance degradation.
6.2.2.2. There was a discussion on having a CA document. A participant expressed a concern on having a new thing invented for the coexistence with .15.
6.2.2.3. There was a discussion on the WLAN user experience. A participant asked if MAC changes are possible, and Chair Halasz responded that the group is allowed to make enhancements to the .11 MAC.
6.2.2.4. There was a discussion on the coverage range (1km vs. 2km) and ad-hoc chair Cheong asked Yokogawa representatives to prepare a submission with a reason for proposing 2km range. Yokogawa representatives responded that they will prepare a submission by the May meeting.
7. Next meetings
7.1. April 18th, 9:30 PM ~ 11:00PM, ET
7.2. April 25th, 9:30 PM ~ 11:00PM, ET
7.3. May 2nd, 9:30 PM ~ 11:00PM, ET
8. Chair Halasz asked if there’s any objection to adjourn, hearing none, the meeting was adjourned at 10:58PM, EDT.
9. References
11-11-0498-00-00ah-channel-models-for-tgah.doc
11-11-0527-00-00ah-requirements-discussion.pptx
11-11-0528-00-00ah-discussion-for-tgah-functional-requirements.ppt
10. Attendance list
Dave Halasz – Aclara (Chair, Selection procedure ad-hoc chair)
Jae-Hyung Song – LG Electronics (Secretary)
Wongyu Song – LG Electronics (Technical Editor)
Suhwook Kim – LG Electronics
Youhan Kim – Atheros communications
Jim Lansford – CSR (Channel model ad-hoc chair)
Minho Cheong – ETRI (Functional Requirements ad-hoc chair)
Jae Seung Lee – ETRI
Heejung Yu – ETRI
Ron Porat – Broadcom
SK Yong – Marvell
Mitsuru Iwaoka – Yokogawa co.
Minutes page 3 Jae-Hyung Song (LG Electronics)