November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Responses to Comments on 802.19.1 PAR
Date: 2009-11-18
Authors:
Name
Company Address
Steve Shellhammer Qualcomm
5775 Morehouse Dr
San Diego, CA 92121
Phone
E-mail
(858) 658-1874
Shellhammer@ieee.org
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.19. 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 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 802.19.
Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures <http:// ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement
"IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents
essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the TAG of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to
reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair
<shellhammer@ieee.org> as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being
developed within the IEEE 802.19 TAG. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at <patcom@ieee.org>.
Submission
Slide 1
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Comments from and responses to 802.11
Comments from and responses to 802.16
Comments from and responses to 802.21
Comments from and responses to 802.22
Comments from and responses to Paul Nikolich
Comments from and responses to James Gilb
Comments from and responses to Bob Grow
Comments from and responses to Wendong Hu
Comments from and responses to Richard Kennedy
Comments from and responses to T. Olson
Submission
Slide 2
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Abstract
• This document provides responses to comments
received on the 802.19.1 PAR/5C
Submission
Slide 3
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from 802.11
Submission
Slide 4
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 new standard for TV white space
coexistence mechanisms, PAR and 5 C
• Questions – Issues to 802.19
• 2.1 Title: Standard for Information Technology Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between
Systems - Local and Metropolitan Area Networks Specific Requirements - Part 19: TV White Space
Coexistence Mechanisms
– Situation #1: Title includes “Coexistence Mechanism”,
– Problem: The PAR and 5C does not define what “Coexistence
Mechanism” is.
– Suggested Fix: In the PAR and 5C define what “Coexistence
Mechanism” really is.
• Straw Poll: Submit to .19: 14 yes, 2 no, 11 abstain
Submission
Slide 5
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
IEEE 802.19 Response
• Response
– We agree that a definition of “Coexistence Mechanism” is lacking
in the PAR. We will add such a definition in the Explanatory
Notes section. Additional detail is provided in response to the
Technical Feasibility comment. We have changed the term
“coexistence mechanisms” to “coexistence methods”
• Changes
– In 8.1 Explanatory Notes we added a definition of coexistence
methods.
Submission
Slide 6
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (2)
• 2.1 Title
– Situation #2: The title specifies that this a Standard.
– Problem: We do not believe it should be Standard. The level of
evidence provided for Feasibility in the 5C does not justify a
Standard
• The 5C does not identify any existing proven similar “coexistence
mechanisms” in any unlicensed bands.
– Suggested Fix. Make this PAR for a Recommended Practice to
provide 802.19 group an opportunity to demonstrate the feasibility
• A Recommended Practice has a trial use aspect that should be
addressed.
• Typically the technical rigor that is employed in creating documents
increases as you go from Guides -> Recommended Practices ->
Standards.
• Strawpoll: submit to .19 – 9 yes 6 no 13 abstain
Submission
Slide 7
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We disagree that this should be Recommended Practice. We believe that
a Recommended Practice will do little to promote coexistence in the TV
band. An 802 Standard for coexistence will provide the market a toolset
for enabling coexistence among their systems.
– We agree that additional material could be added to the Technical
Feasibility section of the 5C
– In the 802.11 TVWS PAR it states in the Explanatory Notes that 802.11
will coexist with other networks and hence it seems that 802.11 believes
that coexistence is feasible
• Changes
– In the Technical Feasibility section of the 5C additional detail has been
added
Submission
Slide 8
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (3)
• 3. The PAR and 5C subject matter do not match.
– The content of the 5C do not relate to the PAR
Submission
Slide 9
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– 802.19 disagrees that the 5C does not match the PAR
– 802.19 acknowledges that the 5C needs additional text on technical
feasibility
• Change
– Will add additional material on technical feasibility in the 5C
Submission
Slide 10
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (3)
• 4. 5C - Technical Feasibility
– The responses to the 3 points are non responsive. The technical
details are not given, or shown by example.
• 11-09/1107r0 (https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/09/11-09-1107-00tvws-some-802-11-comments-on-802-19-par-and-5c.pdf)
Submission
Slide 11
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– 802.19 acknowledges that the 5C needs additional text on technical
feasibility
• Change
– Will add additional material on technical feasibility in the 5C
Submission
Slide 12
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (3)
• 5. 5C – Economic Feasibility
– The response does not address what the cost factors are nor if there
is economic feasibility that has been demonstrated.
Submission
Slide 13
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– 802.19 acknowledges that additional text needs to be added to the
economic feasibility section of the 5C
• Change
– Added text to economic feasibility section of 5C
Submission
Slide 14
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (3)
• 6. 8.1 – 5.5 need explanation
– The Claim is made in the PAR that Quality of Service is improved
for all participants. In unlicensed bands, that is not technically
feasible. There is not enough bandwidth to provide independent
control of QoS.
Submission
Slide 15
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We acknowledge that QoS may not be improved for all
participants, though QoS for most participants may be improved
– We believe that the coexistence mechanisms will improve QoS for
the majority of participants
• Change
– Will change “all” to “most”
Submission
Slide 16
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (4)
• 7. The PAR does not justify the need for a Standard.
– Suggesting a Messaging system rather than a physical system.
– Power consumption considerations.
– Data plane system that does not change the MAC/PHYs, so the
relative rates that are needed to match for communication between
the disparate systems is not shown.
Submission
Slide 17
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We disagree that the PAR does not justify the need for the
standard, even if it is only a messaging system. A messaging
system requires standardization so that all devices can interoperate
– The toolset provided by the standard to the market will allow
device manufacturers and network operators to select the right
tradeoffs (e.g. power consumption) for their systems
• Change
– No changes to PAR required
Submission
Slide 18
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (4)
• 8.Confusion on what the proposed PAR will actually
change?
– It is not clear if 802.19 is going to propose another MAC/PHY or
just provide a layer-3 and above specification.
Submission
Slide 19
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– A messaging system above the MAC layer will be provided in the
standard
– To support sensing only devices, which do not have backhaul
connectivity, coexistence methods may be included in the standard
– Some specific MAC/PHY capabilities (e.g. DFS) may be required
in the individual MAC/PHY standard in order for the devices to
adapt so as to reduce interference between systems
– The standard is not a new MAC/PHY standard
• Change
– Change the phase in the title “coexistence mechanisms” to
“coexistence methods”
– Added language to Explanatory Notes expanding on the scope
Submission
Slide 20
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (4)
• 9. Title is very ambiguous as to what the “Coexistence
Mechanism” really are?
– Is this requiring a new MAC/PHY or changes to existing 802
WGs.
Submission
Slide 21
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We acknowledge that the term is not precise enough and additional
material is needed
• Change
– In the title the term “coexistence mechanisms” has been replaced
by “coexistence methods”
– Additional detail on the coexistence methods is provided in the
explanatory notes section
Submission
Slide 22
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (5)
• 10. From the 5C the following statement needs to be
clarified as to what changes to the 802 WGs are going
to be targeted.
– This standard will not require changes to any existing 802 MAC
SAP definitions, ensuring that all LLC and MAC interfaces are
compatible to and in conformance with the IEEE 802.1
architecture, management and internetworking standards.
Submission
Slide 23
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– This section of the 5C is on compatibility with higher layers
– We plan to be compatible with higher layers
– The standard will provide a toolset that will leverage MAC/PHY
capabilities at defined in the respective MAC/PHY standards
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 24
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Questions – Issues to 802.19 (5)
• 11 – It is implied that a Standard will be imposed on all
the 802 WG after ratification, and what changes may
be required is unknown.
– Provide more detail on what the expectation is that justifies this
being a Standard rather than a Recommended Practice.
Submission
Slide 25
Jon Rosdahl (CSR)
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– There is nothing in the PAR/5C that implies this standard would be
mandated on any of the 802 working groups
– 802 produces standards, standards are not mandated on any group
or individual
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 26
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from 802.16
Submission
Slide 27
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
PAR Comment #1
• Comment 1: In sections “Type of Project: New IEEE Standard”
and “3.1 Working Group: Coexistence TAG (C/LM/WG802.19)”
• There could be potentially a conflict of interest between this new
802.19.1 Project for a new standard and the 802.19 TAG’s
advisory role, which is mandated by Clause 14 of the IEEE 802
Operations Manual (http://www.ieee802.org/PNP/200811/LMSC_OM_approved_081114.pdf ).
• Possible Remedy:
– Option 1: Separate this new standard effort from the 802.19 TAG and
create a new Working Group for this PAR.
– Option 2: Delete Clause 14 from the 802 Operations manual and allow
this group to define coexistence standards that are not mandatory on other
Working Groups.
Submission
Slide 28
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– The 802.19 WG would not develop MAC/PHY standards and so
the potential conflict of interest would not arise
– The EC can place this project in any WG it chooses and can start a
new WG if it so chooses
– Our recommendation is that the work be done 802.19
• Change
– No change required to the PAR
Submission
Slide 29
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
PAR Comment #2
•
Comment 2: In Section 5.2 (Scope):
•
There is concern that this standard would address coexistence with a new
PHY and MAC that would be incompatible with other IEEE 802
standards. We would like this project to define mechanisms that (as
described in the explanatory notes) are radio technology independent and
can be applied in conjunction with existing wireless standards.
•
•
Suggested Remedy:
Please modify the Scope statement “5.2 Scope: The standard specifies radio
technology independent mechanisms for coexistence among dissimilar or
independently operated TV Band Devices (TVBDs). These mechanisms are
applicable to existing IEEE 802 wireless standards.”
Submission
Slide 30
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We accept in principle
• Change
– Will accept some of the recommended changes
Submission
Slide 31
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
5C Comment #1
•
Regarding “Coexistence of 802 wireless standards specifying devices for
unlicensed operation” in the 5C, the following modifications would be
appropriate (see text in blue):
•
“A working group proposing a wireless project is required to demonstrate
coexistence through the preparation of a Coexistence Assurance (CA)
document unless it is not applicable. The Working Group will create a
CA document as part of the WG balloting process. If the Working Group
elects not to create a CA document, it will explain to the EC the reason the
CA document is not applicable.
This standard will enhance coexistence in the TVWS. Evaluation of the
effectiveness of coexistence will be done during standard development.
The working group will create a CA document as part of the WG
balloting process. This document will demonstrate that 802.19.1 coexists
with 802.16h and other unlicensed wireless standards.”
•
Submission
Slide 32
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– The standard will not be a wireless MAC/PHY standard and hence
will not produce a CA document
• Change
– A statement will be added to the 5C saying that a CA document
will not be produced since this is not a wireless MAC/PHY
standard
Submission
Slide 33
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from IEEE 802.21
Submission
Slide 34
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments on Scope
Scope:
• - Does this PAR propose changes to MAC/PHY to address co-existence
• issues or does this PAR propose media independent mechanisms for coexistence?
• * Please note that 802.21 MIIS (Media Independent Information
• Service) is a protocol/mechanism for signaling or control channel access
• information.
• - Does this Project consider developing specific signaling mechanisms
• between devices for resolving co-existence issues or does it just rely on the
• regulatory TVWS database to discover available frequencies in any given
area?
• - Can the mechanisms proposed in this specification apply to other
• unlicensed bands as well?
Submission
Slide 35
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– Certain MAC/PHY capabilities may be described in the standard.
Such capabilities may included things like DFS and TPC.
– In the course of standard development the WG will consider use of
access to the TVWS database as well as other methods
– It is expected that the coexistence methods developed in the
standard may be useful in other bands
• Change
– Changes were made to the explanatory notes
Submission
Slide 36
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments on Purpose
Purpose:
• - The purpose of the standard is to enable the family of IEEE 802
Wireless Standards to most effectively use TV White Space by
providing standard coexistence mechanisms among dissimilar or
independently operated TVBD networks and dissimilar TVBDs
• Clarify what is meant by "most effectively" in above sentence? Is
there any quantitative criteria/metrics for measuring this?
Submission
Slide 37
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We agree that the wording can be improved
– Specific metrics will be developed and used during the
development of the standard
• Change
– Deleted the word “most”
Submission
Slide 38
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from IEEE 802.22
Submission
Slide 39
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1
• 5.2 Scope of Proposed Standard
• Comments:
• Clarify what layers the to-be-specified coexistence
mechanisms will reside in, and whether they will be in
the MAC/PHY layers or higher layers or cross-layers.
•
Submission
Slide 40
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We agree that new material needs to be added
– The standard will specify methods above layer two and will
reference existing MAC/PHY mechanisms
• Change
– Added additional material to the explanatory notes section of the
PAR
Submission
Slide 41
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #2
• 5.3 Is the completion of this standard is dependent upon the
completion of another standard
• Comments:
• The proposed project is intended to develop cross-technologies
coexistence mechanisms. At this point, there is no existing
technology that has completed its development or in operation in
the TVWS. Please clarify how the mechanisms to be developed in
this project can be applicable to TVWS coexistence without having
any knowledge of or compatibility with any known TVWS radio
technologies. We suggest changing the answer to “YES”.
Submission
Slide 42
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– 802.19 believe that now is the time to start developing a
coexistence standard and it we wait until the MAC/PHY standards
are complete we can have little impact on those standards
– In any case this standard is not dependent on the MAC/PHY
standards in the TVWS
• Change
– No change
Submission
Slide 43
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #3
• 8.1 Additional Explanatory Notes
•
• Comments on Section 5.2 (Scope):
• There are two types of TVBDs: 1) lower power personal/portable
devices at up to 100mW EIRP and 2) fixed device at up to 1W
output power and 4W EIRP. Please clarify whether they are all
considered as "low power" transmitters in indicated in this
section?
Submission
Slide 44
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– Yes, the term low-power in the Explanatory Notes section refers to
both fixed and personal/portable TV band devices as specified by
the FCC.
• Change
– No change
Submission
Slide 45
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #4
• 8.1 Additional Explanatory Notes
•
• Comments on Sec. 5.5 (Need):
• Again, please clarify how the technology-independent coexistence
mechanisms could address operations such as "discovery",
"connectivity" and "QoS maximization" for different technologies
without having had any knowledge of and compatibility with those
technologies. Note that the answer to item 5.3 is "NO". We suggest
changing the answer to question in 5.3 to “YES”.
Submission
Slide 46
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– The 802.19 WG will work closely with 802.11 and 802.22 to have
detailed knowledge of their MAC/PHY drafts
– Many of the 802.19 members are also active members of other
wireless working groups and very aware of the details of the
specific standards and drafts
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 47
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from Paul Nikolich
Submission
Slide 48
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1 (1)
•
•
Steve, Bruce, Wendong,
Please circulate the following comments to your respective WGs regarding the draft PARs on TV
Whitespace.
•
1) The proposed 802.11 TV Whitespace PAR contains coexistence language "It is in the best interest of
users and the industry to strive for a level of coexistence between wireless systems in the TVWS bands.
WG11 TVWS provides mechanisms for coexistence with other systems. One approach is a common
coexistence mechanism that may be used by other TVWS systems; other approaches are also possible."
•
2) The proposed 802.22 modified PAR also contains coexistence language "It is in the best interest of
users and the industry to strive for a level of coexistence between wireless systems. The IEEE 802.22 WG
provides mechanisms for coexistence with other systems in the TVWS band. One approach is a common
coexistence mechanism that may be used by other TVWS systems; other approaches are also possible.
•
•
3) The proposed 802.19 TV Whitespace Coexistence Mechanisms PAR contains coexistence language
Scope: "The standard specifies mechanisms for coexistence among dissimilar or independently operated
TV Band Device (TVBD) networks and dissimilar TV Band Devices." and
Purpose: "The purpose of the standard is to enable the family of IEEE 802 Wireless Standards to most
effectively use TV White Space by providing standard coexistence mechanisms among dissimilar or
independently operated TVBD networks and dissimilar TVBDs. This standard addresses coexistence for
IEEE 802 networks and devices and will also be useful for non IEEE 802 networks and TVBDs."
•
Submission
Slide 49
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1 (2)
•
•
My comment:
There is a fair degree of common language in the coexistence language taken from
the above 3 draft PARs addressing the TV Whitespace bands.
•
Since the 3 draft PARs (dot 19, dot11 and dot22) are being proposed
simultaneously the groups haven't had much time to work on coordinating their
activities on the draft PAR language. However it will be useful for EC members to
better understand how the groups are thinking about coordinating their
coexistence specifications going forward.
•
I understand the groups have begun general discussion on coordinating their
activities--this is good. I believe any specifics that each of you can provide
regarding future coordination mechanisms among the 3 projects would be useful to
the EC members.
•
•
Regards,
--Paul
Submission
Slide 50
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We recommend the following methods of coordination between
WGs
• The WGs hold a joint meeting at each Plenary and Interim session
• Liaisons be established between WGs specifically tasked with
coordinating on these three projects
• WG liaisons vote on WG ballots and provide comments from any and
all WG members on the drafts from the other WGs
• Change
– No change to PAR/5C required
Submission
Slide 51
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from James Gilb
Submission
Slide 52
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1 (1)
•
Dear EC members
•
It appears that we have multiple PARs that potentially deal with the same
problem but leading to different solutions to the same problem.
•
There can be reasons to do this, but I think we would benefit by working
together in some of these areas.
•
For example, the systems in these bands will need to access a database of
incumbents. The access to this database should be the same in any
standard we develop.
Submission
Slide 53
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1 (2)
Coexistence:
• We have proposal for a project to define coexistence between these systems,
but neither PAR references this.
•
•
I would hope that we can find some language that strongly encourages the
TVWS MAC/PHY groups to adopt the work of the coexistence group.
However, I would not be happy with the case where the groups were held up
waiting for completion of the coexistence standard.
•
I would encourage the 802.11 TVWS and 802.22.3 to find agreement on
language that requires support of the 802.19 methods, if they are completed in
a timely manner.
•
•
James Gilb
802 Recording Secretary
Submission
Slide 54
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We agree
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 55
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Bob Grow (Email to James Gilb)
• James:
• I support your comment, on the need for the different projects to
relate with each other. But, I also was disappointed in the failure
to address the work of SCC 41 and its relationship to the various
white space draft PARs.
• --Bob Grow
Submission
Slide 56
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– The chair of SCC41 has been an active participant in the TVWS
Coexistence SG
– The chair of P1900.5 use case ad hoc is a voting member of 802.19
and an active participant in the TVWS Coexistence SG
– Several other members of SCC41 have also participated in the
802.19 TVWS Coexistence SG
– The PAR recognizes the SCC41 project 1900.4a as a related
project
• Change
– No change
Submission
Slide 57
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from Wendong Hu
Submission
Slide 58
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1
• Scope
• What layers will the to-be-specified coexistence
mechanisms be resided in? Will they be in the
MAC/PHY layers or higher layers or across all layers?
Submission
Slide 59
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– This comment matches Comment #1 from 802.22
– See response to that comment
Submission
Slide 60
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #2
• Completion of another standard
• The project is intended to develop cross-technologies
coexistence mechanisms. At this point, there is no
existing technology that has completed its development
or in operation in the TVWS. How can the mechanisms
developed in this project be applicable to TVWS
coexistence without having any knowledge of or
compatibility with known TVWS radio technologies?
Submission
Slide 61
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– This comment matches Comment #2 from 802.22
– See response to that comment
Submission
Slide 62
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #3
• Explanatory Notes
• There are two types of TVBDs: 1) lower power
personal/portable devices at up to 100mW EIRP and 2)
fixed device at up to 1W output power and 4W EIRP.
Are they all considered "low power" transmitters?
Submission
Slide 63
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– This comment matches Comment #3 from 802.22
– See response to that comment
Submission
Slide 64
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #4
• Again, how could the technology-independent
coexistence mechanisms address operations such as
"discovery", "connectivity" and "QoS maximization"
for different technologies without having knowledge of
and compatibility with those technologies? Note that
the answer to item 5.3 is "NO".
Submission
Slide 65
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– This comment matches Comment #4 from 802.22
– See response to that comment
Submission
Slide 66
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from Richard Kennedy
Submission
Slide 67
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1
•
Steve:
•
We are adding the following to our 5 Criteria document and request that
you do the same, changing “802.19” to “802.11”:
•
The 5 Criteria (17.5.4.1 ) will be modified to say “The working group will
create a CA document as part of the WG balloting process. The WG will
maintain liaisons with the other WGs regarding coexistence in the TVWS.
IEEE 802.11 will provide WG drafts with CA documents to 802.19 and
802.22 members for review and WG balloting.”
•
Rich Kennedy
Submission
Slide 68
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– We agree with the intent of the comment
– 802.19 will not produce a CA document since it is not a wireless
MAC/PHY standard
– We recommend the following methods of coordination between WGs
• The WGs hold a joint meeting at each Plenary and Interim sessions
• Liaisons are established between WGs specifically tasked with coordinating on
these three projects
• WG liaisons vote on WG ballots and provide comments from any and all WG
members on the drafts from the other WGs
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 69
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comments from T. Olson
Submission
Slide 70
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
Comment #1
•
•
•
C/LM/WG802.19/802.19.1
P802.19.1 Standard for Information Technology - Telecommunications and
Information Exchange Between Systems - Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks - Specific Requirements - Part 19: TV White Space Coexistence
Mechanisms
Original Comment from T Olsen
Approve, but only for four-year validity. Schedule shows completion in over 5
years
(12/2013 is really 2014). Accelerate schedule to complete balloting no later than
Sept, 2013 with submittal to RevCom in early October, 2013 for consideration
at the
December 2013 meeting.
•
There is no dialog for this comment.
•
•
•
•
Submission
Slide 71
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm
November 2009
doc.: IEEE 802.19-09/0096r0
802.19 Response
• Response
– The first meeting of the WG is January 2010
– Completion of the project by 12/2013 is within 4 years
• Change
– No change required
Submission
Slide 72
Steve Shellhammer, Qualcomm