Project
Title
Date
Submitted
Source(s)
Re:
Abstract
Purpose
Notice
Release
IEEE C802.20-04/16
IEEE 802.20 Working Group on Mobile Broadband Wireless Access
< http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/20/
>
Repeater issues for MBWA
2004-01-11
John Humbert
6220 Sprint Parkway,
MS KSOPHD0504 - 5D276
Overland Park, KS 66251
System Requirements Document
Voice: (816) 210-9611
Fax: (913) 794-0420
Email: jhumbe01@sprintspectrum.com
Detailed discussion of the issues that need to be resolved to get consensus
Detailed issues discussion
This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE 802.20 Working Group. 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.
The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting
IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.20.
Patent Policy The contributor is familiar with IEEE patent policy, as outlined in Section 6.3 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
< http://standards.ieee.org/guides/opman/sect6.html#6.3
> and in Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE Standards Development
< http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/guide.html
>.

C802.20-04/16
John Humbert
January 11 th , 2004
-2-

C802.20-04/16
• Open issues:
– System Gain, Spectral Efficiency
(Contribution pending), Block Assignments
(Contribution pending), Aggregate Data
Rates, Number Simultaneous Active users,
Latency (Contribution pending), FER
(Contribution pending), Best Server
Selection, Performance under mobility &
Delay Spread, IP Level HO, 802.1Q Tagging,
OA&M support, Multicarrier Support.
-3-

C802.20-04/16
• This section was closed, however the evaluation CG needs information from the Requirements CG.
– This was dropped from the requirements document because there are several different types of cells.
-4-

C802.20-04/16
• Work With Dan Gal’s presentation
-5-

C802.20-04/16
• IS there a need to maintain same UL/DL ratio between peak and aggregate data rates?
• Need to ensure the values in this section are consistent with the PAR and other sections of the SRD.
• Aggregate data rates depend on the overall combination of coverage and aggregate capacity and system deployment.
-6-

C802.20-04/16
• The aggregate data rate for downlink and uplink shall be consistent with the spectral efficiency. An example of a 5MHz FDD channel is shown in Table 1 below.
Description Downlink
Outdoor to Indoor
Expected Aggregate
Data Rate
> 10 Mbps/Sector
Uplink
> 5Mbps/Sector
-7-

• Left over from the plenary meeting in
Albuquerque.
-8-

• Current Text
– The system [MAC] should support > 100 simultaneous active users per [??
Mhz/sector] of [channel bw/sector. An active user is a terminal that is registered with a cell and is using or seeking to use air link resources to receive and/or transmit data within a short time interval (e.g., within 50 or 100 ms).
-9-

C802.20-04/16
• Need to determine values and if we want to adopt a different proposal than what was discussed at the plenary meeting.
• Anna Tee was going to present another contribution on this topic
-10-

C802.20-04/16
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The system shall support a variety of traffic classes with different latency and packet error rate requirements as suggested in the RFC "Configuration Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes" http://www.ietf.org/internetdrafts/draft-baker-diffserv-basic-classes-01.tx
t.
Class Attributes of Traffic
-----------------------------------------------------------
Conversational | Two-way, low delay, low data loss
| rate, sensitive to delay variations.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Streaming | Same as conversational, one-way,
| less sensitive to delay. May require
| high bandwidth.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Interactive | Two-way, bursty, variable
| bandwidth requirements moderate
| delay, moderate data loss rate
| correctable in part.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Background | Highly tolerant to delay and data
| loss rate has variable bandwidth.
-----------------------------------------------------------
-11-

C802.20-04/16
• During the meeting in Singapore, Jin-Weon Chang has presented a contribution
(C802.20-03/77, jointly by DS Park & Joseph Cleveland) on the delay spread profiles for mobile channels. In some of the channel models that were specified by ITU, 3GPP or COST 259, the delay spread can be larger than 10 microseconds. Thus, it may be too limited if the future 802.20 system can only work in channel environments that have delay spreads of 5 microseconds or less.
• The suggestion was to have a high-level requirement that would ensure the system could perform satisfactorily in the mobile channel environments, with a high enough probability, without mentioning any parameter related to the channel models.
• Specifying the link reliability by itself is difficult because it naturally depends on the channels models employed and we are not specifying these in the requirements document.
• Note that this was sent back to the CG because the WG was not able to come to consensus in the time allotted.
• This section was remanded back to the CG for resolution.
-12-

C802.20-04/16
• Current text:
– "The system should support a delay spread of at least 5 micro-seconds."
• Proposed Text
– "The system should support a delay spread contained within the 802.20 channel models.
– The system should support a delay spread of at least 5 micro-seconds. The upper limit for comparing the degradation caused by delay spread is bounded by the channel models selected for 802.20.
– "The system should support a delay spread of at least 5 micro-seconds with 100% link Reliability.“
– "The system shall support a delay spread of at least 5 micro-seconds."
-13-

C802.20-04/16
• Specifies a particular architecture
• By driving these functions to layer 2 a provider can build a flatter network supporting simple IP handoff over a larger
802.20 coverage area. These functions can be supported in other ways at a higher layer but are most efficiently handled at layer 2. The evaluation criteria group should report support for tagging so that the 802.20 group can factor support in the selection process.
-14-

C802.20-04/16
• Most recent Proposal
– 802.1q tagging should be supported by the 802.20 system or some other mechanism (i.e. policy routing). Tagging will support the L2 switching such that network egress traffic can be switched by a L2 device to the appropriate L2 termination device for managing backbone traffic or distinguishing traffic for wholesale partners in a wholesale environment. Tagging can also be used to facilitate a retail captive portal service model. By tagging traffic from a mobile terminal that is unknown (i.e. mobile terminal is un-provisioned) it can be switched at
L2 to a system enabling a self provisioning system model. By tagging control and management traffic it to can be switched and separated as close to the base station as possible. All of these can be accomplished at a higher layer but are simpler to implement if 802.1Q tagging is supported.
– 802.1p
– The 802.1Q standard specifies that tags be appended to a MAC frame.
The VLAN tag carries VLAN information. The VLAN tag has two parts:
The VLAN ID (12-bit) and Prioritization (3-bit). The 802.1P implementation defines the prioritization field. 802.1p defines a 32-bit tag header that is inserted after a frame's normal destination and source address header info. Switches, routers, servers, desktop systems, mobile terminals, or base stations can set these priority bits. Switches and routers can prioritize traffic based on these tags.
-15-

•
•
•
•
OA&M (4.5.4)
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Proposed Text
The air interface will provide necessary infrastructure in order for a network operator to monitor the performance of the 802.20 air interface.
The following values must be made available in real-time with redisplay intervals of no less than 1000 msecs, with the option to be displayed in both cumulative and delta modes:
Paging Channel
•
• Paging Channel Delivery
Occupancy/capacity used
•
•
Access Channel
Access Channel Reception
Occupancy/ Capacity
•
State transitions
Timing/ delay
•
Registrations
Successful and failed
•
Forward Traffic Channel Delivery
–
–
Total and Per user
–
–
–
–
MAC retries
PHY retries
MAC/PHY delay
Total blocks/PDU assigned and delivered
Uncorrectable Errors
Signal Strength
•
Reverse Traffic Channel Reception
Total and Per user
–
–
–
–
–
MAC retries
PHY retries
MAC/PHY delay
Total blocks/PDU assigned and delivered
Uncorrectable Errors
– Signal Strength
Hand-offs
Resources allocated per user
•
UL & DL Power Measurements
Total and per user
These statistics should be made available via a network management protocol compliant MIB.

C802.20-04/16
• The AI shall have the ability to support multiple carriers within the same scheduler so that carriers can be stacked within sectors and shall allow flexible augmentation of capacity.
• The AI shall have the ability to support multiple independent channels within the same sector to allow flexible bandwidth utilization and augment capacity within a sector.
-17-