March 2007doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/0395r1

IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs

TGy Meeting Minutes from Mar 2007 Orlando Plenary Session
Date: 2007-3-12
Author(s):
Name / Company / Address / Phone / email
Peter Ecclesine / Cisco Systems / MS SJ-10-5
170 W. Tasman Dr., San Jose, CA95134-1706 / +1-408-527-0815 /
Rich Kennedy / OakTree Wireless / Austin, TX / +1-281-222-6299 /


TGy Meeting Minutes from March 2007 Orlando Plenary Session

Proceedings

Monday PM2, London -17 Attendees - Recording Secretary, Rich Kennedy –Antigua 1 meeting room

Agenda

  • TGy Meeting Call To Order
  • Review IEEE/802 & 802.11 Policies and Rules
  • Approve or Modify Agenda
  • Review and Approve all Minutes
  • Set, Review Objectives
  • Review of situation
  • Overview presentations, PHY, MAC and operation topics
  • LB comment review
  • Recess until 8:00, Thursday, January 18th, 2007
  1. Meeting was called to order by TGy chair at 4:00 PM
  2. Attendance reminder – Electronic using
  3. Chair read IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards and additional Pat Com Guidance
  4. Chair reviewed topics NOT to be discussed during the meeting including – licensing, pricing, litigation, market share, etc.
  5. Chair read the Declaration of Affiliation.
  6. Chair indicated his affiliation is Cisco.
  7. Chair read the copyright notice and security for equipment notices.
  8. Chair discussed his goals for the session and reviewed the agenda.
  9. Chair asked if there were any changes or modifications to the agenda. Hearing none, the agenda was adopted.
  10. Chair discussed the minutes from the London meeting and the four telecoms since that meeting.
  11. Chair asked if there were any matters arising from the minutes. Hearing none, a motion was made to approve:
  12. Moved by: Doug Chan
  13. Seconded by: Dick Roy.
  14. Hearing no discussion on the motion
  15. Vote: 11/0/1
  16. Motion passes.
  17. Chair passed around two memory sticks with the presentations.
  18. Chair reviewed the base documents for TGy, including the PAR scope and purpose, Four Themes and the work done so far and the LB94 comments and submissions.
  19. Chair reviewed the comment spreadsheet. All comments have been addressed, except for one that will be addressed in a presentation Thursday morning, regarding RTS/CTS in outdoor applications.
  20. Chair reviewed the redline version of the draft.
  21. Chair indicated that any additional changes should be done with motions, and should be completed Thursday morning, to be on the server four hours before a final vote to approve the draft at 5:00PM Thursday.
  22. Chair displayed 271r4 showing the PICS table and the changes for Annexes I and J.
  23. Motion was made: Move to accept draft normative text changes in submissions 07-0245r3, 07-0270r1, 07-0271/r4, 07-0272r1, 07-0282r0, and merge their comment resolutions into 07-0008r10, and instruct the editor to prepare P802.11y D1.1
  24. Motion
  25. Moved by: Dick Roy
  26. Seconded by: Dan Lubar
  27. Chair asked if there were any more comments.
  28. Vote: 10/0/1
  29. Motion passes
  30. Chair explained the next steps
  31. Question from the floor: why was the transmit spectrum mask was put back into clause 17?
  32. The mask that goes in the PHY clause is NOT the one that represents the regulatory requirement.
  33. Chair stated that tomorrow morning’s meeting will be on the Energy Detect.
  34. Chair stated that between now and July we should be ready for a Sponsor Ballot.
  35. Chair recessed the meeting at 5:14 PM.
Tues AM1, Orlando – 46 Attendees -- Recording Secretary, Rich Kennedy – Curacao 5&6

Agenda

  • TGy Meeting Call To Order
  • Situation, ballot comments, draft topics; Joint session with 802.16h
  • Recess until 00:00, Thursday, March 18, 2007
  1. Meeting was called to order by TGy chair at 8:05 AM
  2. Attendance reminder – Electronic using
  3. Chair displayed the agenda.
  4. Chair displayed clause 17 changes. He asked if keeping the three paragraph (20MHz, 10MHz and 5MHz) together, followed by the three transmit spectrum diagrams was okay. This was done because the diagrams were copied and contained a significant white space, so if it was added following its paragraph, it would make comparisons of the diagrams easier.
  5. Paragraph 17.3.12 was split into two paragraphs for clarity.
  6. Chair continued a review of the rev 1.1 draft, and asked if there were any more comments. None heard.
  7. Chair reiterated that we will be making some more changes Thursday morning.
  8. At 9:00 AM the Chair passed the gavel to Al Petrick.
  9. Al called the meeting back to order at 9:05, and turned it over to Marianna Goldhammer, chair of 802.16h.
  10. Paul Piggin presented C802.16-07/017r1 – Simulations of 802.16h and 802.11y coexistence.
  11. Marianna said they want to get feedback from 802.11 about the assumptions in their simulation in written form.
  12. John Sydor presented C802.16-07/0xxrx – Simulations of 802.11y and 802.16h coexistence.
  13. Marianna presented C802.16-07/039r1 – interference between 802.11y and 802.16h systems, and asked for feedback on parameters and assumptions. Conclusion is that 802.11y/D1 does not comply with FCC expectations for CBP; cooperative approach is needed.
  14. Peter said that coordination is not possible. There are too many devices possible. He said the simulations are not real assumptions.
  15. Marianna asked if 11y could do simulations. Peter said it is not our job. We will do what we have to do to get FCC approval; nothing else matters.
  16. John Sydor asked for our help in getting both accepted by the FCC.
  17. Peter: All I want is for 11y to be accepted by the FCC and 802.11.
  18. Eldad said there are enough channels that deployments will not be a problem.
  19. Steve Shelhammer said that we could try to get together and harmonize our approaches, and that 802.19 is a place that could be done.
  20. Dan Lubar asked what tools were used for the simulations. They were custom tools.
  21. Eldad said that under certain conditions, no two radios will work together. He said that in the real world you will not see the catastrophic failures that the simulations show.
  22. Adrian said that .16 is successful because it is coordinated; .11 is successful because it is distributed, and that no coordinated system has succeeded in the market. It will be a hard sell to change either group.
  23. John Sydor said isn’t there something we can do to work together.
  24. Peter said we have already built that into 11y.
  25. Peter Murray said there have been two tries in the past, but failed because the groups failed to work together.
  26. The suggestion was made that we concentrate on the science.
  27. Andy said CBP is all about making it work for the consumer.
  28. Adrian said the consumer is best protected by one technology getting to the market first, so the second won’t work, so won’t be deployed in the band.
  29. Straw poll How many people think should 11y and 16h (people) should collaborate:
  30. For – 22 (no vote for against)
  31. How many .11 voters believe we should collaborate:
  32. For – 10
  33. Against – 6
  34. Andy: Should we investigate the real possibility of collaboration
  35. Peter: we are trying to provide a well-formed execution of what the FCC wants for CBP in a timely manner; this is not a five year project.
  36. Chair recessed the meeting at 10:10 AM.
ThursAM1, Orlando – 8 Attendees -- Recording Secretary, Rich Kennedy – Antigua 1

Agenda

  • TGy Meeting Call To Order
  • RTS long slot time discussion, draft review
  • Recess until 4:00 PM, Thursday, March 15, 2007
  1. Meeting was called to order by TGy chair at 8:00 AM
  2. Attendance reminder – Electronic using
  3. Chair displayed the agenda
  4. Inoue-san presented his document (11-07-0401-01-000y-long-slottime-option-rtscts-procedure) on his RTS long slot time proposal.
  5. Charles questioned whether the simulation contemplated multiple RTS tries; maybe the simulation is more pessimistic than it should be. He also asked how this would affect normal operation.
  6. Peter said we can add, with the Coverage Class value to set outdoor mode to trigger this behaviour.
  7. Roger D. said this is not a 100% solution. It is possible that two clients could send out RTS simultaneously, even in the long slot time.
  8. Straw Poll: How many people would like to see the long slot time option in the next version of the draft
  9. Yes 5
  10. No 1
  11. Chair used the result to resolve CID 209
  12. Is there any objection to declining the comment? None heard.
  13. With that, all comments have been resolved.
  14. Chair asked if anyone had a response to his Tuesday request for any other editorial changes that could be put into draft 1.2. Hearing none.
  15. Chair reviewed comments that were changed from Accept to Counter because the subject of the comment had been edited out of the draft.
  16. Chair called for a 5 minute recess (to get document numbers).
  17. Motion: Move to accept submission 07/0473r0 and merge their comment resolutions into 07-0008r11 and instruct the editor to prepare P802.11y D1.2
  18. Moved: Vinko
  19. Second: Amer
  20. Vote 7/0/0
  21. Motion passes.
  22. Chair discussed next steps.
  23. Chair displayed the FrameMaker edited draft.
  24. Chair recessed the group at 8:35 AM.
ThursPM2, Orlando – 8 Attendees -- Recording Secretary, Rich Kennedy – Antigua 1

Agenda

  • TGy Meeting Call To Order at 4:00 PM
  • Draft D1.xx and 2.0y topics, planning through Jul 07 and Motions for WG
  • Adjourn
  1. Meeting was called to order by TGy chair at 4:02 PM.
  2. Attendance reminder – Electronic using
  3. Chair displayed the agenda
  4. Chair asked if there were any issues arising from the completed comment spreadsheet. None heard.
  5. Chair explained “Accepted in Principle” aka Counter.
  6. Motion: Move to accept the resolutions for TGy LB94 comments as written in spreadsheet document 07/0008r12
  7. Moved: Dan Lubar
  8. Second: Dick Roy
  9. Is there any objection to approving it unanimously? None heard.
  10. Vote: Unanimous
  11. Motion: Passes
  12. Motion: Moved: Instruct the technical editor to rename 802.11y draft 1.2 as P802.11y draft 2.0. Having addressed all comments arising from the WG Letter Ballot 94, Task Group y resolves to forward P802.11y draft 2.0 to the working group for the purpose of conducting a 15-day recirculation letter ballot. The purpose of the working group letter ballot is to forward the draft to sponsor ballot.
    –The text of the motion to be presented to the working group will be “Move to authorize a 15-day Working Group Recirculation Letter Ballot of P802.11y draft 2.0, asking the question “Should the P802.11y draft 2.0 be forwarded to sponsor ballot?””
  13. Moved:Dan L.
  14. Second:Inoue-san
  15. Is there objection to approving it unanimously? None heard.
  16. Vote:Unanimous
  17. Motion: Passes
  18. Motion: Move to request that the 802.11 WG approve requests for assignment by the ANA of three Element IDs, one Spectrum management Action Value, and Regulatory Class values for 5-, 10- and 20-MHz channel bandwidths.
  19. Moved:Rich K.
  20. Seconded:Roger D.
  21. Is there objection to approving it unanimously? None heard.
  22. Vote:Unanimous
  23. Motion: Passes
  24. Chair explained the projected schedule following this meeting. He asked for opinions. No substantive comments were heard.
  25. Motion to Adjourn: Rich K.
  26. Second: Dan.
  27. Adjourned at 4:25 PM

References:

FCC 05-56 ( )

IEEE 802.11 Drafts (in IEEE Member Area)

P802.11-REVma-D9.0.pdf

P802.11y-D1.2.pdf

TGy Reference Docs: (in ftp.ieeewirelessworld.com)

11-06-0571-00-000y-cbp-tg-telecon-minutes-19-april.doc

11-06-0607-00-000y-TGy-telecon-minutes-3May.doc

11-06-0668-01-000y-3650-3700-mhz-fcc-action.ppt

11-06-0680-01-000y-may-chairs-report.ppt

11-06-0740-00-000y-joint-tgy-rr-tag-may-minutes.doc

11-06-0855-03-000y-Annex-and-J-3650-MHz-band.doc

11-06-0863-02-000y-tgy-june-14th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-0864-04-000y-3650-mhz-mobile-service-enablement.doc

11-06-0867-02-000y-references-mobile-service-enablement.doc

11-06-0873-00-000y-tgy-june-28th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-0922-00-000y-tgy-july-11th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-0955-03-000y-ofdm-phy-3650-mhz-band.doc

11-06-1023-01-000y-proposal-tgy.ppt

11-06-1024-02-000y-tgy-july-chairs-report.ppt

11-06-1120-00-000y-Minutes-from-San-Diego-Plenary-2006.doc

11-06-1374-00-000y-aug15th-and-aug29th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-1427-00-000y-sept12th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-1432-01-000y-extended-channel-switch-announement-normative-text.doc

11-06-1433-00-000y-extended-channel-switch-announement-presentation.ppt

11-06-1466-01-000y-tgy-September-chairs-report.ppt (from Melbourne Interim)

11-06-1536-00-000y-proprosed-draft-revision.doc

11-06-1537-00-000y-melbourne-minutes-september.doc

11-06-1561-00-000y-tgy-sept-26th-2006-conference-call-minutes.doc

11-06-1609-04-000y-tgy-internal-review-comment-submissions.xls

11-06-1830-00-000y-dse-in-licensed-band-operations.doc

11-06-1675-02-000y-tgy-November-chairs-report-ppt.ppt (from Dallas Plenary)

11-06-1865-00-000y-tgy-brief-intro-to-tgy.doc

11-06-1871-00-000y-TGy-2006-Dallas-Plenary-Minutes.doc

11-06-1934-05-000n-tgn-opening-report-london-jan-07

11-07-0008-12-000y-tgy-lb94-comment-spreadsheet

11-07-0098-00-000y-tgy-january-chairs-report

11-07-0121-00-000y-tgy-meeting-minutes-from-jan-2007-london-interim-session

11-07-0245-03-000y-lb94-7-10-11-submission

11-07-0270-01-000y-tgy-lb94-3-4-5-6-9-8-submission

11-07-0272-01-000y-phy-comments

11-07-0282-00-000y-tgy-lb94-17-etc-submission

11-07-0373-01-000y-tgy-march-opening-report

11-07-0392-00-000y-tgy-redline-between-draft-d1-0-and-d1-1

11-07-0395-00-000y-tgy-meeting-minutes-mar-2007-orlando-plenary

11-07-0401-01-000y-long-slottime-option-rtscts-procedure

11-07-0473-00-000y-tgy-lb94-submission-editors-resolutions

11-07-0479-00-000y-tgy-redline-between-d1-0-and-d1-2

Acronyms/Abbreviations:

DEIdependent enablement identifier

DSEdependent station enablement

Submissionpage 1Rich Kennedy, OakTree Wireless