July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.11 comments on Pending 802 PARs – July 2011
Date: 2011-07-19
Authors:
Name
Affiliations Address
Jon Rosdahl CSR
Submission
Phone
10871 N 5750 W
+1801-492-4023
Highland, UT 84003
Slide 1
email
jrosdahl@ieee.org
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
Abstract
• 802.1AXbq amendment for distributed resilient network
interconnect, PAR and 5C
• 802.1ASbt amendment for timing and synchronization for timesensitive applications, PAR and 5C
• 802.1 AS corrigendum, PAR, no 5C required as this is a
maintenance item.
• 802.1BR new standard for bridge port extension, PAR and 5C
• 802.3bj amendment for 100 Gb/s operation over backplanes and
copper cables, PAR and 5C
• 802.15.4m amendment to 802.15.4 for TV white space PHY, PAR
and 5C
• 802.22 amendment for management and control plane interfaces
and procedures and management information base enhancements,
PAR and 5C
Submission
Slide 2
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.1 PARS
• 802.1ASbt amendment for timing and synchronization
for time-sensitive applications, PAR and 5C
• 802.1 AS corrigendum, PAR, no 5C required as this is a
maintenance item.
• 802.1BR new standard for bridge port extension, PAR
and 5C
– No comments were made.
Submission
Slide 3
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.3 Pars
• 802.1AXbq amendment for distributed resilient
network interconnect, PAR and 5C
• 802.3bj amendment for 100 Gb/s operation over
backplanes and copper cables, PAR and 5C
– General Comment on the length of time from Initial Sponsor Ballot
to Projected Compleation Date for RevCom….general rule of
thumb is that for amdendments, that this be at least 6 months.
Submission
Slide 4
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.15.4m amendment to 802.15.4 for TV
white space PHY, PAR and 5C
• 5.2 Scope:
–
–
–
–
Which Regulatory Domains are you planning to address?
Which coexistence set will you use?
How will you address which database access will be used?
What is the approach that will be used to securely access the
Geolocation database? (Note it will be different from country to
country).
– Suggested Scope: This amendment specifies a physical layer for
802.15.4 meeting TV white space regulatory requirements in “X”,
“Y” and “Z”. MAC changes required to support this physical layer
are also described. This amendment enables operation in the white
spaces of the TV Bands while supporting data rates in the 40 kbits
per second to 2000 kbits per second range. This amendment
targets power efficient device command and control applications.
Submission
Slide 5
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
15.1.4.m
• 5.3 Other Standard:
– Should be yes: “PAWS” or similar database protocol standard.
• 5.4 Purpose:
– Suggest replace with “This document will not have a purpose clause”.
– You should not restate the scope in the purpose statement.
• 5.6 Stakeholders:
– There are more players for large scale command and control applications
• Add the following: Industrial Automation providers, Building Automation
providers, Intelligent Traffic System Providers, Large Scale Monitoring for
Safety providers.
• 8.1 Notes: – Instructions require item number and explanation. What item is the
statement trying to support?
• Suggest that this may be included in the scope statement as a final sentence.
Submission
Slide 6
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
15.1.4m
• 1. Broad Market Potential:
– This does not seem to be a personal area network application.
• 3. Distinct Identify
– a) spelling error – “application”
– b) this statement seems to be overly vague. Once 802.11af plus
802.11ah are in the base 802.11 standard, it could in fact provide
this same solution set.
• 4. Technical Feasibility
– a) The FCC rules are not complete, so compliance cannot be
claimed.
– b) what is the value of “The WPAN application presents no unique
challenges”?
Submission
Slide 7
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
15.1.4m
• 5 Economic Feasibility
– TV White Space devices may not have the same costs as the
traditional 15.1.4 devices due implementation details to meet:
• regulatory requirements –
– database access method will include additional costs
– Spectral mask has been defined more tightly than in the past.
• The current FCC spectral mask may result in significant cost increases.
• Anntenna size differences
Submission
Slide 8
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.22 amendment for management and control
plane interfaces and procedures and management
information base enhancements, PAR and 5C
• 2.1 Title:
– What is the real work that is being cited in the title?
• 5.2 Scope:
– suggest the following for your Scope:
This amendment defines new Management and Control Plan
interfaces for the IEEE 802.22 standard. The existing
Management Information Base (MIB) is enhanced to
accommodate the new interfaces. The Primitives for Cognitive
Radio Capabilities have been extended to align with the new
interface definitions.
Submission
Slide 9
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.22.a
• 5.3 Other Standard:
– Should be yes: “PAWS” or similar database protocol standard.
• 5.4 Purpose
– The scope and purpose should describe the final document not the
project. If you do not include a purpose statement in the Amendment it is
better to write “Document will not have a purpose statement”.
• 5.5 Need:
– The statement should be more succinct and focused.
• 5.6 stakeholders –
– Who are the stakeholders, not just lists of industry descriptions.
– List who has stake in 802.22 not who 802.22 is looking to include.
• 8.1 note:
– you need to include the item number that you are commenting
on. ("Item Number and Explanation").
This is a better Scope statement that what is in 5.2.
• General: Please check the instructions for PARs again, and comply
with the instructions.
Submission
Slide 10
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
802.22.a
• Five Criteria is not numbered…
• 1. Broad Market Potential
– a) What does this have to do with the scope of the proposed
project?
– a) Live-stock monitoring may need a MIB, but Live-Stock
Monitoring applications are probably not the motivation for
enhancing the 802.22 MIB. Rewrite Market Potential.
• 3. Distinct Identity:
– c) The proposed title, scope and purpose were not defined to make
it easy for anyone to select this standard for relevant applications.
Submission
Slide 11
Jon Rosdahl, CSR
July 2011
doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0997r0
References
Submission
Slide 12
Jon Rosdahl, CSR