1
Project
IEEE 802.20 Working Group on Mobile Broadband Wireless Access
<http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/20/>
Title
Draft Meeting Minutes, 802.20 Plenary Meeting - Session #11, San Antonio, Texas,
November 15-19, 2004
Date
Submitted
2004-9-17
Source(s)
Rao Yallapragada
QUALCOMM, Incorporated
5775 Morehouse Drive
San Diego, CA, 92121
Re:
802.20 Session#11
Abstract
Draft of the Minutes of the Session #11;
Purpose
Minutes of the Session.
Voice: +1 858 658 4540
Fax: +1 858 651 2880
Email: rao@qualcomm.com
Release
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>.
Notice
2
Draft - Meeting Minutes of the 802.20 Session #11
November 15-19, 2004
San Antonio, TX
Rao Yallapragada
Secretary
The eleventh session of 802.20 was held at the November 2004 Plenary meeting of IEEE
802 in San Antonio, Texas.
The session began with an Opening 802 Plenary meeting at 11:00 am on November 15,
2004.
Contributions and WG documents referenced in these minutes may be found at the
802.20 website, http://www.ieee802.org/20/
See Appendix A for the attendance list.
Minutes of 802.20 Monday November 15, 2004
Meeting started at 1:30 pm.
Chair opened the meeting for 802.20 WG to review the following:
-
-
Purpose of the meeting
Logistics of the session
IEEE 802 meeting conduct and WG policies and procedures
Voting Rights
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Logistics for the session
Next Meeting information
Chair explained the manual sign in process including the Company Affiliation and Sign
in procedure.
The Chair’s Opening Slides are Appendix B.
Chair called the WG members to sign in.
Time: 2:25 pm
Chair presented the proposed detailed agenda for the current plenary session (Appendix
C).
Motion #1
Motion to approve the Agenda (Appendix C)
Mover: Joanne Wilson
3
Second: Mark Klerer
Time: 1:30 pm
Motion passes without any objections
Motion #2
Motion to approve meeting minutes of July and Sept sessions
Mover: Joanne Wilson
Second: Dennis Jones
Time: 1:32 pm
Motion passes without any objections
Chair presented 802.16 PAR on (802.16h_PAR.pdf)
Chair presented the proposed Document Closure Process for documents and there were
no objections or modifications.
Time: 2:45 pm
Presentation by Anna Tee on “IEEE 802.20 Evaluation Criteria and Channel Model
Status” (C802.20-04/80)
Break: 4:00 pm
Presentation by Qiang Guo on “IEEE 802.20 Channel Model Status” (C802.2004/84)
Discussion followed
The Channel Documents Editor mentioned that Version 7 of the document will be posted
at the end current session.
Time: 4:45 pm
Meeting recessed for the day.
4
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Meeting began at 8:00 am
The chair reviewed the agenda (Appendix C).
Presentation by Anna Tee on “System Level Calibration Method for IEEE 802.20
Technology Evaluation” (C802.20-04-83r1)
Discussion followed:
Questions raised regarding the choice of Lognormal Shadowing standard deviation = 8
dB
Presentation by Anna Tee “Channel models mix for IEEE 802.20 technology
evaluation” (C802.20-04-82r1)
Discussion followed
Break 10:00am
Resume 10:30 am
Presentation by David Huo on “Method for capturing Noises in Digital Radio
Receiver” (C802.20-04-81.pdf)
The Chair asked David to provide a contribution on the proposed text for Evaluation
Criteria document based upon this contribution for the group’s consideration. (C802.2004-89 was posted later in the session)
Lunch Break: 12:15 pm
Resume: 1:15 pm
Presentation by Arak Sutivong on “Evaluation Criteria Document Issues” (C802.2004-85.pdf)
Discussion followed.
Questions were raised in regards to the definitions of Phase 0 and Phase 1.
Presentation by Anna Tee on “Comments and suggestions on open issues in the
IEEE 802.20 evaluation criteria document” (C802.20-04-88)
Discussion followed.
Break: 2:45 pm
Resume: 3:15 pm
5
Presentation by Jim Tomcik on “Gaming Models for Evaluation Criteria” (C802.2004-86)
Discussion followed.
Time: 5:15 pm
Chair shared SK Telecom’s forecast on the gaming usage on data networks.
Chair reviewed the remainder of the agenda
Chair proposed multiple options to modify the agenda to make further progress during
this session
Chair suggested moving the Channel Model discussion to Wed morning that was
originally slated for Wed afternoon.
Revised Agenda was approved without objection. (Appendix D)
Time: 5:30 pm
Meeting recessed for the day
6
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
Meeting began at 8:00 am.
Chair reviewed the modified agenda (Appendix D) and again no Objections.
Presentation by Achilles Kogiantis on “Overview of the Spatial Channel Model
developed for 3GPP & 3GPP2 “ (C802.20-04-79r)
Discussion followed
Time: 10:00 am
Break: 10:05 am
Resume: 10:30 am
Presentation continued
Discussion followed
Time: 11:50 am
Presentation by David Huo on “ Outline of Elementary Issues Regarding the
Channel Models ” (C802.20-04-77)
Discussion followed
Presentation by David Huo on “ Outline of Elementary Issues Regarding the
Channel Models ” (C802.20-04-76)
Lunch Break: 12:26 pm.
Resume: 1:30 pm
Presentation by Ayman Naguib on “ Channel Model Document Issues ” (C802.2004-87)
Discussion followed.
Following the above presentation, the Chair suggested the WG to start reviewing the
Channel Model Document by first going over the issues just presented.
Review of Section 2.3, Channel Models Document
Motion #3
Motion to adopt the following text for Section 2.3
In this approach, exact locations of the primary scatterers, their physical characteristics,
as well as the exact location of the transmitter and receiver are assumed known. The
resulting channel characteristics are then predicted by summing the contributions from a
7
large number of the paths through the simulated environment from each transmit antenna
to each receive antenna. This technique provides fairly accurate channel prediction by
using site-specific information, such as building databases of architectural drawings.
However, this method is primarily useful for indoor channel modeling since it is often
considered too complex for modeling outdoor environment because of the difficulty in
obtaining detailed terrain and building databases.
Mover: Joanne Wilson
Second: Mark Klerer
Discussion followed
Friendly amendment by Jim Ragsdale
Mover and second approves
Results:
Yes: 23
No: 21
Time: 2:17 pm
Motion fails
Discussion followed.
Motion #4
Motion to adopt the following text for section 2.3
In this approach, exact locations of the primary scatterers, their physical
characteristics, as well as the exact location of the transmitter and receiver are
assumed known. The resulting channel characteristics are then predicted by
summing the contributions from a large number of the paths through the
simulated environment from each transmit antenna to each receive antenna. This
technique provides fairly accurate channel prediction by using site-specific
information, such as building databases of architectural drawings.
Mover: David Huo
Second: Jim Ragsdale
Mark Klerer made a friendly amendment
Rejected by Mover
Debate followed
8
Results:
Yes: 9
No: 33
Time: 2: 28 pm
Motion fails
Discussion followed
Modifications were proposed to the above text for section 2.3. Chair asked for a straw
poll on the new options.
Straw Poll:
Option 2: Text as shown below
In this approach, exact locations of the primary scatterers, their physical characteristics,
as well as the exact location of the transmitter and receiver are assumed known. The
resulting channel characteristics are then predicted by summing the contributions from a
large number of the paths through the simulated environment from each transmit antenna
to each receive antenna. This technique provides fairly accurate channel prediction by
using site-specific information, such as building databases of architectural drawings.
For modeling outdoor environments this approach requires detailed terrain and building
databases
Vote:
In favor: 28
Against: 9
Option 3: Using Option 2 text but delete last two sentences. Text proposed is as shown
below
In this approach, exact locations of the primary scatterers, their physical characteristics,
as well as the exact location of the transmitter and receiver are assumed known. The
resulting channel characteristics are then predicted by summing the contributions from a
large number of the paths through the simulated environment from each transmit antenna
to each receive antenna. For modeling outdoor environments this approach requires
detailed terrain and building databases
Vote:
In favor: 2
Against: 19
9
Motion#5
Motion to adopt Option 2
Mover: Ayman Naguib
Second: Mark Epstein
Results:
Yes: 36
No: 3
Time: 3:05 pm
Motion Passes
Break: 3:05 pm
Resume: 3:25 pm
Review of Section 2.5.1
After considerable discussion multiple options were proposed. The chair requested a
straw poll on each of the options:
Straw Poll:
Option 1: At the BS, a linear antenna array is assumed. Three values for
reference antenna element spacing are defined as: 0.5  , 4  , and 10  .
Yes: 11
No: 2
Option 2: At the BS, antenna arrays can be either arranged as a linear or
circular array. In the case of a linear antenna array, Three values for reference
antenna element spacing are defined as: 0.5  , 4  , and 10  . In the case of a
circular array, an extra array parameter representing the “radius” of the array is
specified (Need to state an appropriate value).
Yes: 12
No: 1
Option 3: At the BS, a linear antenna array is assumed. Three values for
reference antenna element spacing are defined as: 0.5  , 4  , and 10  . The
number of antenna elements is two
Yes: 8
No: 1
10
Motion #6
Motion to adopt Option 2
Mover: Machael Yussefmir
Second: David James
Yes: 17
No: 17
Time: 4:05 pm
Motion fails
Motion #7
Motion to adopt Option 1
Mover: Ayman Naguib
Second: Mark Klerer
In favor: 31
Against: 10
Time: 4:17 pm
Motion Passes
Review of Section 2.5.2
Discussion followed and multiple options were proposed. Chair requested a straw poll.
Straw Poll:
Option 1: The individual path powers are defined in the temporal ITU SISO
channel models. (original text)
Straw Poll
In favor: 19
Against: 5
Option 1: The individual resolvable path powers are defined in the temporal ITU
SISO channel models.
In favor: 11
Against: 8
11
Option 2: Remove the sentence
In favor: 12
Against: 8
Chair requested to minute that there was no support for either of the options for
modifying the text in Section 2.5.2 and there was no motion made.
Chair requested Achilles Kogiantis and Ayman Naguib to work on Consensus text on
2.5.2
Review of Section 2.6.1
Discussion followed and multiple options proposed.
Straw Poll:
Option 1:
There are two elements.
Straw Poll:
In favor: 8
Opposed: 5
Option 2:
Elements are arranged as a linear array
In favor: 14
Opposed: 13
No support for either option, therefore the section remains unchanged
Review of Section 2.6.4
Discussion followed and multiple options proposed.
Straw Poll:
Option 1: Change Nothing
In favor: 20
Opposed: 12
Option 2: Change the title to from PAS to APS
12
In favor: 14
Opposed: 17
Review of Section 2.6.4
It was proposed to the current equation for pi and theta as follows:
-pi <= theta < pi
No objections were raised. Change was approved.
Review of Section 2.7.2
Add footnote: When applying this model to a transmitter /receiver proposal, the effect of
any additional filtering, e.g., pulse shaping and receive filtering must be taken into
account and the equivalent digital channel taps will in general be correlated.
Straw Poll
In favor: 25
Opposed: 4
Debate followed:
WG adopted on the following text:
Add footnote: When applying this model to a transmitter /receiver proposal, the effect of
any additional filtering, e.g., pulse shaping and receive filtering must be taken into
account since the equivalent digital channel taps will in general be correlated.
Chair proposed changes to the agenda for the remainder of the session.
The modified agenda (Appendix E) was approved without objections
Time: 5:10 pm
Meeting recessed for the day.
13
Thursday, November 18, 2004
Meeting began at 8:00 am.
Chair reviewed the agenda for the remainder of the session given in Appendix E.
Review of Section 1, Channel Models Document
Debate followed.
Chair instructed Achilles Kogiantis, David Huo and Mark Klerer to form an adhoc group
and requested it to craft the proposed text during the break.
Break: 9:30 am
Resume: 10:00 am
The adhoc group presented the text they worked during the break.
Debate followed. More changes were made to the text.
Motion #8
Motion to add the following text to the current text in Section 1:
Proposals are evaluated and compared based on the Spatial Channel Model (SCM)
described in this document. For Phase 1 (as defined in the Evaluation Criteria Document
(Ref), the parameters have been adjusted to fixed values in the SCM model in order to
produce results as close as possible to the ITU Model as specified in Section 2 of this
document. This facilitates comparison with documented performance results of existing
systems suing ITU models.
Mover: Joanne Wilson
Second: David James
In favor: 37
Opposed: 0
Abstain: 1
Time: 10:10 am
Motion passes.
Review of Sections 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 continued
Following changes are proposed to Section 2.5.2 & 2.5.3:
2.5.2
BS Angles of Departure and Arrival
14
The Angle of Departure (AoD) is defined to be the mean angle with which departing
ray’s power is transmitted by the BS array with respect to the broadside. The Angle of
Arrival (AoA) is defined to be the mean angle with which an arriving ray’s power is
transmitted by the BS array with respect to the broadside. At the base station the AOD
and AOA have identical values. The two values considered are:

AoD/AoA: 50 degrees (associated with the RMS Angle Spread of 2 o )

AoD/AoA: 20 degrees (associated with the RMS Angle Spread of 5o )
The order of these two sections are also swapped
2.5.3
BS Angle Spread
The base station per-path angle spread is defined as the root mean square (RMS) of
angles with which ray’s power is transmitted or received by the base station MEA. The
individual path powers are defined in the temporal ITU SISO channel models. Three
values of BS angle spread (each associated with a corresponding mean AoD/AoA) are
considered in this document:

AS: 2 degrees at AoD/AoA = 50o

AS: 5 degrees at AoD/AoA = 20 o

AS: 25 degree at AoD/AoA= 20 o for the case of indoor pico cell
Attention should be paid when comparing the link level performance between the two
angles spread values since the BS antenna gains for the two corresponding AoDs and
AoA are different.
Review of Section 2.6.1
The text is accepted however clarification of how the value specified in the section is
arrived has been requested
Review of Section 2.6.4
Discussion on the tables of Section 2.7 (2.7.1 & 2.7.2).
Chair requested Farooq Khan and Jim Ragsdale to work on a consensus text.
Lunch Break: 12:00 pm
Resume: 1:30 pm
Chair reviewed the agenda for the afternoon session.
15
Farooq Khan and Jim Ragsdale presented a synopsis of the agreement that was reached
on sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2.
Changes were presented for tables 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 as shown below.
Changes were accepted without objections.
2.7.1 Link Level Channel Model Parameter Summary
The following table summarizes the physical parameters to be used for link level
modeling.
Models
PDP
case-i
case-ii
case-iii
case-Iv
Modified
Pedestrian-A
Vehicular-A
Pedestrian-B
(Phase I)
Vehicular-B
(Phase I)
Number of
Paths
1)
Delay (ns)
Relative Path power (dB)
2)
Speed (km/h)
6
6
1) 0,
2) -  ,
1) -6.51,
2) 0,
0
0
0
0
0
-2.5
0
0
-1.0
310
-0.9
200
0
300
1) 16.21,
2) -9.7
110
-9.0
710
-4.9
800
-12.8
8900
1) -25.71,
2) –19.2
190
-10.0
1090
-8.0
1200
-10.0
12900
1) 29.31,
2) -22.8
410
-15.0
1730
-7.8
2300
-25.2
17100
-20.0
2510
-23.9
3700
-16.0
20000
1) 3
2) 30, 120
30, 120, 250
0.5λ
0.5λ
M
o
bi
le
St
at
io
n
Topology
6
4+1 (LOS
on, K =
6dB)
4 (LOS
off)
3,[ 30, 120,]
[Ed.Note:
Subject to
consistency with
EV doc ]
0.5λ
[30,] 120
[Ed.Note: Subject
to consistency with
EV doc ]
0.5λ
16
PAS
1)
Base Station
DoT
(degrees)
AoA
(degrees)
LOS on: Fixed
AoA for LOS
component,
remaining power
has 360 degree
uniform PAS.
2) LOS off: PAS
with a Laplacian
distribution, RMS
angle spread of 35
degrees per path
0
RMS angle spread of
35 degrees per path
with a Laplacian
distribution
Or 360 degree
uniform PAS
22.5 (LOS
component)
67.5 (all other
paths)
RMS angle spread
of 35 degrees per
path with a
Laplacian
distribution
RMS angle spread of
35 degrees per path
with a Laplacian
distribution
Or 360 degree
uniform PAS
22.5
-22.5
22.5
67.5 (all paths)
67.5 (all paths)
67.5 (all paths)
Topology
Reference: ULA with
0.5λ-spacing or 4λ-spacing or 10λ-spacing
PAS
Laplacian distribution with RMS angle spread of
2 degrees or 5 degrees,
per path depending on AoA/AoD
AoD/AoA
50 for 2 RMS angle spread per path
20 for 5 RMS angle spread per path
(degrees)
Table 2.1 Summary of Link Level Channel Model Parameters
2.7.2 Reference Values for Spatial Channel Model Parameters
Each resolvable path is characterized by its own spatial channel parameters (angle spread,
angle of arrival, power azimuth spectrum). All paths are assumed independent1. These
assumptions apply to both BS and MS. The above assumptions are in effect only for the
Link Level channel model. For the purpose of calibrating software simulator and link
level simulations, reference values of the average complex correlation values and its
magnitude are given below in Table 2.2.
BS
1
Antenna
Spacing
AS
(degrees)
AOA
(degrees)
Correlation
(magnitude)
Complex Correlation
0.5
5
20
0.9688
0.4743+0.8448i
0.5
2
50
0.9975
-0.7367+0.6725i
4
5
20
0.3224
-0.2144+0.2408i
4
2
50
0.8624
0.8025+0.3158i
When applying this model to a transmitter/receiver proposal, the effect of any additional filtering, e.g.
pulse shaping and receive filtering, must be taken into account since the equivalent digital channel taps will
in general be correlated.
17
MS
10
5
20
0.0704
-0.0617+i0.034
10
2
50
0.5018
-0.2762-i0.4190
104
0
0.3042
-0.3042
35
-67.5
0.7744
-0.6948-i0.342
35
22.5
0.4399
0.0861+0.431i
35
67.5
0.7744
-0.6948+i0.342




2
2
2
2
Table 2.2 Reference Correlation Values
New section 2.7.3 is added
“2.7.3 SCM Model Assumption for Correlation to ITU Models”
Text needs to be added for the above section.
Review of Section 3
Changes were proposed to the first paragraph of Section 3.1 to read as follows:
“The spatial channel model for MBWA system-level simulations is described in this
chapter. As in the link level simulations, the description is in the context of a downlink
system where BS transmits to a MS; however the methodology described here can be
applied to the uplink as well. [Note: Additional information may be required to apply this
methodology for the uplink.] The goal of this chapter is to define the methodology and
parameters for generating the spatial and temporal MIMO channel model coefficients for
MBWA system simulations.”
No objections raised
Changes proposed to References to add reference #12
No objections were raised.
Break: 2:40 pm
Resume: 3:10 pm
Chair Presented on the Next Steps for Documents (Appendix F)
Chair requested the Channel Models Editor to post the annotated & completed text in a
Version 7 of the Channel Models document.
Chair proposed an update to the current IEEE 802.20 Project Development Plan
18
A debate followed
The chair’s plan proposed to issue the call for proposals in March 2005
An alternate proposal was made to issue the call for proposals in December 2004.
Debate followed.
Chair called for a straw poll.
Straw Poll
Call for Proposals in December 2004: 7
Call for Proposals in March 2005: 28
Chair requested a Motion to approve the revised work plan in Appendix G.
Motion #9
Motion to approve the proposed plan in Appendix G
Mover: Dan Gal
Second: Ayman Naguib
Debate followed
Results:
Yes: 34
No: 7
Abstain: 3
Time: 3: 30 pm
Motion passes
Motion # 10
Motion to adjourn
Mover: Ayman
Second: Dan Gal
No objections were raised.
Time: 3:42 pm
Session #11 is adjourned
19
Appendix A: Attendance List
Last Name
Alder
Bajaj
Barriac
Batin
Bernstein
Bravin
Bussey
Canchi
Carneiro
Carson
Castell
Chickneas
Cho
Davis
Dodd
Dorward
Entzminger
Epstein
Ferauson
Gal
Garcia-Alis
Giles
Gomes
Guo
Gorodetsky
Hou
Huo
James
Jones
Khademi
Khan
Kimura
Kitahra
Kitamura
Klerer
Knisely
Knowles
First Name
Larry
Rashmi
Gwen
Colin
Jeffrey
Nancy
Chris
Radhakrishna
Edson
Peter
Harold . P.
Jim
Juphil
Chantal
Donald
Lynne
Lindell
Mark
Alistair
Dan
Daniel
Arthur
Eladio
Qiang
Svetlana
Victor
David
David S.
Dennis
Majid
Farooq
Shigeru
Minako
Takuya
Mark
Douglas
Skip
Company/Organization
ArrayComm
France Telecom
Qualcomm
Alcatel
TMG
Consultant
Bussey Consulting
Kyocera
Edmais Computer Services
Qualcomm
Bussey Consulting
Consultant/Lucent
ETRI
Industry Canada
Case Communications
Ladcomm
Consultant/Lucent
Qualcomm
Selbourne Associates
Lucent
Univ. of Strathclyde
US Global Telecom
Double E Enterprises
Motorola
Gorodetsky Consulting
Broadcom
Lucent
Oak Global BV
Taliesen Consulting
Khademi Consulting
Samsung
Kyocera
Kyocera
Fujitsu
Flarion Technologies
Lucent
Bussey Consulting
Participation
Credit
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
20
Kogianitis
Kuze
Lalaguna
Lawrence
Li
Love
Martynov
Martynov
McMillan
Miyazono
Naguib
Naidu
Nguyen
Novick
Pirhonen
Pittampalli
Polcari
Polsgrove
Prakash
Preece
Priebe
Pulcini
Qu
Ragsdale
Shields
Shively
Springer
Stone
Sutivong
Tee
Tomcik
Toro
Trick
Tsui
Upton
Valls
Vivanco
Wasilewski
Wieczorek
Wilson
Wu
Yallapragada
Youssefmir
Yuda
Yuza
Achiles
Tosiyuk
Pablo
Lisa
Jun
Newton
Michael
Irina
Donald
Max
Ayman
Mullaguru
Paul Tuan
Fred
Riku
Eshwar
Amy
Jim
Rajat
Rob
Russell
Gregory
Bingyu
James
Judy
David
Warren
Mike
Arak
Lai-King Anna
James
Steven
John
Daniel
Jerry
Juan Carlos
Silvia
Thomas
Alfred
Joanne
Gang
Rao
Michael
Tetsuya
Masaaki
Lucent
Yes
Mitsubishi Electric
No
MedStar
Yes
CTCI Group
Yes
Nortel Networks
No
Alion Science
No
Belgud International
Yes
Belgud International
Yes
Advanced Network Technical Solutions Yes
Qualcomm
No
Qualcomm
Yes
Qualcomm
No
DISA
No
BCSI
Yes
Nokia
Yes
Lucent
Yes
BCSI
Yes
Wireless Edge
Yes
Qualcomm
Yes
BCSI
Yes
Freescale Semiconductors
Yes
Bussey Consulting
Yes
Huawei
No
Ericsson
Yes
Ladcomm Corp.
Yes
Cingular Wireless
Yes
Springer Associates
Yes
Consultant
Yes
Qualcomm
Yes
Samsung
Yes
Qualcomm
No
Sane Solutions LLC
Yes
Bussey Consulting
Yes
Interdigital
Yes
JUpton Consulting; Qualcomm
Yes
TMG Group
Yes
TMG
Yes
Qualcomm
No
Motorola
No
ArrayComm
Yes
DoCoMo USA; Paragon Wireless
Yes
Qualcomm
Yes
ArrayComm
Yes
KTRC
Yes
NEC
Yes
21
Appendix B: Chair’s Opening Slides
IEEE 802.20
802 Opening
November 2004 Plenary
802.20 Session #11
Jerry Upton- Chair
jerry.upton@ieee.org
Gang Wu – Procedural Vice Chair
Eshwar Pittampalli – Liaison Vice Chair
November 15, 2004
Chair, IEEE 802.20
22
Appendix C: Approved Detailed Agenda on November 15, 2004
Approved 11/15 04
Proposed Detail Agenda – November 2004 Plenary
Monday, November 15, 2004 11:00AM – 12:30PM Ballroom C – HBG – Conference Center
IEEE 802 Opening Plenary (Lunch 12:30-1:30pm)
Monday, Nov. 15, 2004 1:30PM – 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Opening Session of 802.20
- IEEE IPR rules, meeting conduct & session logistics
- Voting Tokens
- Review and Approve 802.20 Agenda
- Review and approve July & September Minutes
- Review Other WGs Activities
Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models Closure Process
Status Reports:
- Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models (F. Khan)
- Channel Models (Q. Guo)
1:30-3:00pm
3:00-3:30pm
4:00-5:30pm
C802.20-04/80
C802.20-04/84
Monday, Nov. 15, 2004 6:30PM - 9:00PM (optional Ad-Hocs & Tutorials)
Please see note on next page regarding PM and AM agenda item changes
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Contributions
- System Level Calibration Method for Eval. (A. Tee)
- Channel Models Mix for Eval. (A. Tee)
- Method for Capturing Noises in Digital Radio (D. Huo)
- Eval. Criteria Doc. Issues (A. Sutivong)
8:00am-9:00am
9:00am-10:00am
10:30am-11:30am
11:30am-12:30pm
C802.20-04/83
C802.20-04/82
C802.20-04/81
C802.20-04/85
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 1:30PM – 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
- Comments on Open Issues in Eval.Criteria Doc. (A. Tee) 1:30pm-2:00pm
2:00pm-2:45pm
- Gaming Models (J. Tomick)
2:45pm-5:30pm
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Review & Voting
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 7:00PM - 9:00PM (optional Ad-Hocs & Tutorials)
802.20-04/88
802.20-04/86
23
Note: Agenda items on Thursday PM may move to Thurs. AM, if AM items are
completed early. Otherwise agenda items will not move from PM to AM or from
different days.
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Review & Voting
Channel Models Contributions
- Spatial Channel Models in 3GPP-3GPP2 (A. Kogiantis)
8:00am-10:00am
10:30am-12:30pm C802.20-04/79
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 1:30PM - 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Channel Models Contributions- Cont.
- Channel Models Doc. Issues (A. Naguib)
Channel Models Review and Voting
1:30pm- 2:15pm
2:15pm- 5:30pm
802 Social
6:30pm – 11:00pm
C802.20-04/87
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Technology Selection Process (D. Gal)
8:00am – 10:00am C802.20-04/72r1
Continue Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models, if needed 10:30am- 12:30pm
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 1:30PM - 5:00PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Continue Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models, if needed
Work Plan Schedule update & Call for Proposals Plan
New Business
Next Meeting Planning
Close and Adjourn
1:30pm-3:00pm
3:00pm-3:30pm
4:00pm-4:15pm
4:15pm-4:45pm
4:45pm-5:00pm
24
Appendix D: Modified Agenda on 11/17/04
Approved 11/15 04
Proposed Detail Agenda – November 2004 Plenary
Monday, November 15, 2004 11:00AM – 12:30PM Ballroom C – HBG – Conference Center
IEEE 802 Opening Plenary (Lunch 12:30-1:30pm)
Monday, Nov. 15, 2004 1:30PM – 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Opening Session of 802.20
- IEEE IPR rules, meeting conduct & session logistics
- Voting Tokens
- Review and Approve 802.20 Agenda
- Review and approve July & September Minutes
- Review Other WGs Activities
Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models Closure Process
Status Reports:
- Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models (F. Khan)
- Channel Models (Q. Guo)
1:30-3:00pm
3:00-3:30pm
4:00-5:30pm
C802.20-04/80
C802.20-04/84
Monday, Nov. 15, 2004 6:30PM - 9:00PM (optional Ad-Hocs & Tutorials)
Please see note on next page regarding PM and AM agenda item changes
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Contributions
- System Level Calibration Method for Eval. (A. Tee)
- Channel Models Mix for Eval. (A. Tee)
- Method for Capturing Noises in Digital Radio (D. Huo)
- Eval. Criteria Doc. Issues (A. Sutivong)
8:00am-9:00am
9:00am-10:00am
10:30am-11:30am
11:30am-12:30pm
C802.20-04/83
C802.20-04/82
C802.20-04/81
C802.20-04/85
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 1:30PM – 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
- Comments on Open Issues in Eval.Criteria Doc. (A. Tee) 1:30pm-2:00pm
2:00pm-2:45pm
- Gaming Models (J. Tomick)
2:45pm-5:30pm
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Review & Voting
Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 7:00PM - 9:00PM (optional Ad-Hocs & Tutorials)
802.20-04/88
802.20-04/86
25
Note: Agenda items on Thursday PM may move to Thurs. AM, if AM items are
completed early. Otherwise agenda items will not move from PM to AM or from
different days.
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Channel Models Contributions
- Spatial Channel Models in 3GPP-3GPP2 (A. Kogiantis)
8:00am-10:00am
- Elementary Issues Channel Models(D. Huo) from Berlin
10:30am-11:00pm
- Proposed Text Channel Models (D. Huo) from Berlin
11:00am-11:30am
- Channel Models Doc. Issues (A. Naguib)
11:30am-12:00pm
C802.20-04/79
C802.20-04/76
C802.20-04/77
C802.20-04/87
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 1:30PM - 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Channel Models Review and Voting
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Review & Voting
1:30pm- 5;30pm
if time allows
802 Social
6:30pm – 11:00pm
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Channel Models Review and Voting
8:00am – 12:30pm
Note:Technology Selection Process Contribution deferred
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 1:30PM - 5:00PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Continue Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models
Work Plan Schedule update & Call for Proposals Plan
New Business
Next Meeting Planning
Close and Adjourn
1:30pm-3:00pm
3:00pm-3:30pm
4:00pm-4:15pm
4:15pm-4:45pm
4:45pm-5:00pm
26
Appendix E: Modified and Agreed Agenda on Wednesday, November 17,
5:00 PM for the remainder of the session
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Channel Models Contributions
- Spatial Channel Models in 3GPP-3GPP2 (A. Kogiantis)
8:00am-10:00am
- Elementary Issues Channel Models(D. Huo) from Berlin
10:30am-11:00pm
- Proposed Text Channel Models (D. Huo) from Berlin
11:00am-11:30am
- Channel Models Doc. Issues (A. Naguib)
11:30am-12:00pm
C802.20-04/79
C802.20-04/76
C802.20-04/77
C802.20-04/87
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2004 1:30PM - 5:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Channel Models Review and Voting
Evaluation Criteria & Traffic Models Review & Voting
1:30pm- 5;30pm
if time allows
802 Social
6:30pm – 11:00pm
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 8:00AM - 12:30PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 10:00 – 10:30AM)
Channel Models Review and Voting
8:00am – 12:30pm
Note:Technology Selection Process Contribution deferred
Thursday, Nov. 18, 2004 1:30PM - 5:00PM Maverick – Hyatt (Break 3:30 – 4:00PM)
Continue Evaluation Criteria & Channel Models
Work Plan Schedule update & Call for Proposals Plan
New Business
Next Meeting Planning
Close and Adjourn
1:30pm-3:00pm
3:00pm-3:30pm
4:00pm-4:15pm
4:15pm-4:45pm
4:45pm-5:00pm
27
Appendix F: Next Steps on Documents, November 18, 2004
Document Editors execute the following process steps:
1. Create new version of the Document provide for posting in the Drop Box based
upon Plenary. Include agreed changes and annotated notes
2. Develop list of items for closure
3. Schedules Conference Calls and sent out the notices to 802.20 all
4. Update the Document based on consensus conclusions from the calls. Annotate
the document changes/additions as coming from a specific conference call.
5. Add Options to Document, if no consensus.
Members are requested to review the Document and provide Contribution/Proposals for
Sections that are open. Provide proposals for discussion on Conference Calls.
28
Appendix G: IEEE 802.20 Project Development Plan- Proposed update
• Project Launch Process:
July 04 Dates
– ECSG Approval of PAR/5C
– Approval of PAR/5C by LMSC Executive Committee
– Approval of PAR by IEEE-SA Board
New Dates
Sept 02
Nov 15, 02
Dec 12, 02
• Stage Setting:
–
–
–
–
–
Initial Membership Meeting
Closure on Requirements
Closure on Channel Models
Closure on Evaluation Criteria
Procedure for proposal selection and merging (“Down select”)
Mar. 03
July 04
Sept 04
Sept 04
Sept 04
Jan/Mar 05
Jan/Mar 05
Mar 05
• Proposal Selection
– Call for Proposals
– Proposal Presentations, Simulation Results, and Mergers
– Final Selections
Sept 04
Nov 04-May 05
July 05
Mar 05
May-Sept 05
Nov 05
• Standard Development
–
–
–
–
–
Drafting the Standard
First WG Letter Ballot
Second WG Ballot
Sponsor Ballot
Sponsor Recirculation
July-Sept 05
Oct 05
Feb 06
June 06
Sept 06
Nov 05-Jan 06
Jan 06
May 06
July 06
Sept 06
Nov 06
Dec 06
Nov 06
Dec 06
• IEEE-SA Approval
– Submission to Rev. Com
– SA Approval