September 2004 IEEE 802.19-04/0031r0

IEEE P802.15

Wireless Personal Area Networks

Project / IEEE P802.19 Coexistence TAG
Title / Minutes of 802.19 September 2004 Interim Meeting
Date Submitted / 14 September 2004
Source / Colin Lanzl
Aware, Inc.
40 Middlesex Turnpike, Bedford, MA, 01730-1432, USA / Voice:+1-781-687-0578
Fax:+1-781-276-4001
E-mail:
Re:
Abstract / Minutes for September 2004 meeting of Wireless Coexistence TAG
Purpose / To document discussions undertaken and decisions made.
Notice / This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.19. 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 P802.19.
  1. Chair calls meeting called to order at 8:10am, Tuesday, September 14, 2004.
  1. Agenda
  2. Review EC results vote on proposed P&P changes;
  3. Review process of P&P change;
  4. Comment resolution on letter ballot comments;
  5. Hear technical submissions on coexistence, if available.
  1. Agenda approved by unanimous consent.
  1. Minutes of July meeting approved by unanimous consent
  1. 19-04-29r0 letter Executive Committee letter ballot results:
  2. First part of text is letter ballot text;
  3. Second part is comments from EC members;
  4. Tom will edit revised P&P text document based on decisions in these meetings.
  5. ballot summary
  6. Yes: 11
  7. No: 2, with comments
  8. Did not vote: 3.
  9. Yes/total:
  10. 11/16=0.6875, passed.
  1. Process of P&P changes / approval at EC:
  2. Implementing this will require interaction with other working groups;
  3. Only have liaisons to 802.11 and 802.15;
  4. Should set up liaisons with 16, 20 and 22 throughEC reflector; Steve will take this action.
  1. Comment Resolution
  2. Comments from Paul Nikolich.
  3. comment 1:

FROM:

“Coexistence with 802 wireless standards in unlicensed bands.
The working group proposing a wireless project is required to produce a Coexistence Assurance (CA) document unless it is not applicable.”

TO:

“Coexistence with 802 wireless standards in unlicensed bands.
The working group proposing a wireless project is required todemonstrate coexistencethrough the preparation ofa Coexistence Assurance (CA) document unless it is not applicable.”

Resolution: Unanimous agreement to make the change verbatim.

7.1.2.comment 2:

FROM:

“The working group makes the determination on whether the coexistence necessary for the standard or amendment has been met.”

TO:

“Theballotgroup (eitherworking group or sponsor)makes the determination on whether the coexistence necessary for the standard or amendment has been met if the ballot reaches the 75% approval threshold.”

Discussion: the effect of this is to provide a check and balance on the operation of the working group.

Resolution: Unanimous agreement to make the change verbatim.

7.2.Comments from Roger Marks.

7.2.1.(a) The language does not define coexistence or Coexistence Assurance. This leaves everyone who needs to make a judgement on this (including the Working Group and the EC) little guidance in knowing what is expected. This can be a big problem. I expect that development of CA document is going to significantly delay new standards from going to Working Group ballot, while participants look around to figure out who is going to fund the consultants required to prepare a CA document. Unless we are clear in what is required, this barrier could easily turn into a blockade to new standards.

Resolution:802.19 is developing the CA methodology to give guidance to all the wireless working groups on what a CA document is and how to prepare it. 802.19 invites (and needs) assistance from the wireless working groups in this effort. Each of the wireless groups developing standards in an unlicensed band has a vested interest in coexistence.

This resolution was accepted by unanimous consent.

Agreed: To produce two new documents, one with the revised text of the proposed P&P changes (Tom) and another providing the comment resolutions (Colin) in addition to the minutes (Colin).

7.2.2.(b) The proposed Procedure talks about "Coexistence with 802 wireless standards in unlicensed bands." This would, literally, apply only to approved standards, not to drafts or projects in process, but this should be made more explicit so no one needs to guess. Also, it's not clear whether we need to coexist with every device that may be built to the standard, or to just the devices that already exist. For example, in some cases, 802 standards would allow devices in many frequency bands. Is it necessary to show coexistence in bands where no such devices exist? Are we trying to coexist with the standards or the devices?

Resolution:In paragraph 2, procedure 11 cites that the CA document shall address coexistence with relevant 802 wireless standards. Each working group and the 802.19 tag will make the determination on relevance.

Additionally, Tom moves and Colin seconds that this comment is accepted by modifying procedure 11 as follows:

From:

"The CA document shall address coexistence with all relevant 802 wireless standards in the unlicensed bands. The working group should include other users of the target band(s) in their analysis."

To:

The CA document shall address coexistence with all relevant approved 802 wireless standards in the unlicensed bands. The working group should include other users of the target band(s) in their analysis.

This amendment was accepted by unanimous consent.

7.2.3.(c) Likewise, the meaning of "The working group should include other users of the target band(s) in their analysis." is not fully clear. Now are we trying to coexist with "users" instead of either "devices" or "standards"?

Resolution:802.19 accepts the comment in principle. Colin moves and Tom seconds that the text in procedure 11 be altered:

from:

"The working group should include other users of the target band(s) in their analysis."

to:

"The working group should consider other specifications in their identified target band(s) in the CA document."

The 802.19 tag agrees that the text was not clear and procedure 11, paragraph 2 was changed to better reflect the intent. The word user was replaced with the word specification to clarify that working groups only consider coexistence with documents rather than users or devices.

7.2.4.(d) The wording "The CA document shall accompany the draft on all wireless working group letter and sponsor ballots" is ambiguous. Does "wireless" modify "working group" or "ballots"? Better to just change "wireless" to "relevant".

Resolution:The 802.19 tag agrees in principle with the comment. Tom moves and Colin seconds the change:

From:

"The CA document shall accompany the draft on all wireless working group letter and sponsor ballots."

To:

"The CA document shall accompany the draft on all wireless working group letter ballots and sponsor ballots."

The amendment was approved by unanimous consent.

Additionally, the 802.19 TAG always assumed that wireless modifies working group.

7.2.5.(e) The last line ("The working group makes the determination on whether the coexistence necessary for the standard or amendment has been met.") is inappropriate unless "working group" is replaced by "ballot group".

Resolution:This comment is accepted and was resolved in an earlier comment (see the resolution to comment 2 from Paul Nikolitch).

7.2.6.(f) Editorially, the references to Procedure 2 and Procedure 11 are no longer appropriate, given the current P&P format.

Resolution:The 802.19 TAG accepts this comment. The 802.19 TAG will work with the editor of the P&P document to properly integrate this document with the P&P. This resolution was accepted by unanimous consent.

  1. Document numbers

The chair provides document number 19-04-0031-00 for these minutes, 19-04-0032-00 for the revised text for the coexistence P&P changes and 19-04-0033-00 for the comment resolution document and 19-04-0034-00 for the 802.19 closing report.

  1. Recess

Colin moves that the meeting be recessed, Tom seconds; no objections, approved by unanimous consent: meeting recessed at 10:05.

  1. Action Items
  2. Colin will produce the minutes of the meetings in 19-04-0031-00 and email to the chair.
  3. Tom will produce the revised P&P text in 19-04-0032-00 and email to the chair.
  4. Colin will produce the comment resolution document in 19-04-0033-00 and email to the chair.
  5. Chair will send email requests for liaisons to 802.16, 802.20 and 802.22 to the respective chairs using the EC email reflector.
  6. Chair will submit the revised P&P document and the comment resolution document to the EC.

Tentative MinutesPage 1Colin Lanzl, Aware