802.11 March 2009 Closing Plenary Reports - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

802 11 march 2009 closing plenary reports l.jpg
Download
1 / 108

802.11 March 2009 Closing Plenary Reports. Authors:. Date: 2009-03-12. Abstract. This document is a digest of the closing reports of all 802.11 sub-groups for presentation at the March 2009 closing plenary meeting. 802.11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Mar 09). Date: 2009-03-12. Authors:.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

802.11 March 2009 Closing Plenary Reports

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


802 11 march 2009 closing plenary reports l.jpg

802.11 March 2009 Closing Plenary Reports

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-12

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation


Abstract l.jpg

Abstract

  • This document is a digest of the closing reports of all 802.11 sub-groups for presentation at the March 2009 closing plenary meeting.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation


802 11 wg editor s meeting mar 09 l.jpg

802.11 WG Editor’s Meeting (Mar 09)

Date: 2009-03-12

Authors:

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Summary of actions 2009 03 10 l.jpg

Summary of actions – 2009-03-10

  • Michelle to check Get802 status for .11r - done

  • Nancy to publish MEC comments for .11w

  • Adrian to ping Menzo on whether he has updated 11-08/0644r5 (numbering spreadsheet) – done, in process

  • Goal: get TGz and TGp to have updated the numbering spreadsheet by May 09 meeting.

  • All: please send draft status update via the editor’s reflector asap, but no later than Thursday am2 to update table on next page!

  • Necati email to Michelle list of issues with templates

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Abstract agenda l.jpg

Abstract / Agenda

Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector

Publication Work Plan

Amendment Ordering / ANA Status / Draft Snapshots

Draft naming rules

Conference Calls

Editorial Streamlining Projects

Archival material

Lessons Learned

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Roll call l.jpg

Roll Call

Editor’s Present

P802.11mb Amendment (REVmb) – Adrian Stephens

P802.11n Amendment (HT) – Adrian Stephens

P802.11p Amendment (WAVE) – Wayne Fisher

P802.11s Amendment (MESH) –Kazuyuki Sakoda (until end ‘09)

P802.11u Amendment (IW) -- Necati Canpolat

P802.11w Amendment (SEC) – Nancy Cam-Winget

P802.11v Amendment (WNM) – Emily Qi

P802.11aa Amendment (VTS) – Hang Liu

Also present:

IEEE Staff present:

Michelle Turner – staff editor for 802, m.turner@ieee.org

802.11 Editor’s Not Present

P802.11y Amendment (CBP) – Peter Ecclesine

P802.11z Amendment (TDLS) – Menzo Wentink

IEEE Staff not present and always welcome!

Kim Breitfelder – manager publishing, k.breitfelder@ieee.org?

Michael Kipness – our staff liaison, m.kipness@ieee.org?

Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings

Michelle Turner is present at this plenary meeting

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Volunteer editor contacts l.jpg

Volunteer Editor Contacts

TGn – Adrian Stephens – adrian.p.stephens@intel.com

TGp – Wayne Fisher – wfisher@arinc.com

TGs – Temporary: Kazuyuki Sakoda - KazuyukiA.Sakoda@jp.sony.com

TGu – Necati Canpolat – necati.canpolat@intel.com

TGv – Emily Qi – emily.h.qi@intel.com

TGw – Nancy Cam-Winget – ncamwing@cisco.com

TGz – Menzo Wentink– mwentink@qualcomm.com

TGmb – Adrian Stephens – adrian.p.stephens@intel.com (TBC)

TGaa – Hang Liu – hang.liu@thomson.net

Editor Emeritus:

TGk – Joe Kwak– joekwak@sbcglobal.net

TGr – Bill Marshall – wtm@research.att.com

TGy – Peter Ecclesine – pecclesi@cisco.com

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Reflector updates l.jpg

Reflector Updates

  • Each editor is expected to be on the reflector and current.

  • If you didn’t receive the meeting notice from the reflector, please send email to adrian.p.stephens@intel.com

  • To be updated:

    • None

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Ieee publication status l.jpg

IEEE Publication Status

IEEE 802.11-2007 published and for free download with Get802

Published in June 2007

Combines all existing amendments and includes maintenance work by TGma

Publications completed for 802.11k, 802.11r and 802.11y,

11k now available with Get802

11r now available with Get802

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Mec status l.jpg

MEC Status

  • P802.11n D6.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination (document 11-08-1045r0)

    • SCC14 coordination done

    • Second review by Michelle pending

  • 11w has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination (09-????) in September

    • Action: Nancy to publish MEC comments for .11w

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 8 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Alignment process for 802 11k r y l.jpg

Alignment Process for 802.11k/r/y

  • The 08/0644r5 Numbering Spreadsheet has all changes from publication of 11k and 11r and 11y (and 11n D7.03 and 11w D7.0)

  • ?? TGz has done it?

  • Action: Adrian to ping Menzo on whether he has updated 11-08/0644r5 (numbering spreadsheet)

  • TGp – Wayne

  • Goal: get TGz and TGp to have updated the numbering spreadsheet by May 09 meeting.

  • Then discuss at May Meeting, expectation TGv correct numbering.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 9 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Amendment other ordering notes l.jpg

Amendment & other ordering notes

  • Editors define publication order independent of working group public timelines:

    • Since official timeline is volatile and moves around

    • Publication order helps provide stability in amendment numbering, figures, clauses and other numbering assignments

    • Editors are committed to maintain a rational publication order

  • Numbering spreadsheet 08/0644:

    • Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates

    • Must match the official timeline

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 10 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Numbering of annexes and clauses l.jpg

Numbering of Annexes and Clauses

  • Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes

    • Ample bad precedent set by 11k

    • Bibliography should be the final annex per IEEE Standards Style Guide

  • Clause numbering has similar issue during rollup

    • TGn clause 3a, 11r clause 11a, 11y clause 11.9a

  • REVmb numbering will stay using “Amendment style” numbering until the very last possible moment.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 11 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Ana announcements l.jpg

ANA Announcements

Current ANA announced to group is 802.11-09-0031r2.

See https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/file/08/11-09-0031-02-0000-ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls

All new requests received by end of meeting will be uploaded and announced via 802.11 WG reflector

No requests have been received directly from editors this week and acted on in preparation for publishing next version.

Others as may arise before the editors conference call #1 will be included

Procedure for ANA is contained in 07/0827r0.

See http://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/public/07/11-07-0827-00-0000-assigned-number-authority-ana-mechanisms.ppt

Editorial Guidance

ANA assignments should be done at the time of moving from WG LB to Sponsor ballot.

If a resource number is not in the ANA Database, please use <ANA> in drafts!

Editors to replace any ANA controlled resources numbers with <ANA> upon incorporation of material into drafts.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 12 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Amendment ordering l.jpg

Amendment Ordering

Amendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers!

  • Data as of March 12 from 802.11 website.

  • See http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/11/Reports/802.11_Timelines.htm

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 13 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Email your draft status updates l.jpg

Email Your Draft Status Updates

Each editor, please send update for next page via the editor’s reflector no later than Thursday am2 to update table on next page!

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 14 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Slide17 l.jpg

Draft Development Snapshot

Changes from last report shown in red.

Most current doc shaded green.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 15 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Editorial streamlining l.jpg

Editorial Streamlining

Focus is on consistency across all TGs:

Completed

Streamlined ANA processes – 07/0827r0

Consistent format for REDLINE contributions across TGs – 07/0788r0

Consistent process for editorial comment resolution across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/2050r0

Guideline for technical vs. editorial, sample editorial comment responses

Format for comment reporting across TGs (WG & Sponsor) – 07/1990r0 (tool in 07/2116r0)

Stable numbering method (See 07/2810r0)

Consistent naming of redlines (See 07/2810r0)

Draft templates for FRAME (no Word) to help train new editors more rapidly

Under Construction(in priority order)

Revise the editor’s guideline

Mentoring program – Name a mentor for each new editor

Request in future Plenary sessions Mondays 7:30pm Frame surgery

MIB element numbering and compiling – publish a rolled-up MIB of k/r/y

Guideline on non-technical front matter

Guideline describing expected editorial development and maturity of draft through stages in 802.11 for consistency across TGs

Guidelines for primitives – ARC to consider

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 16 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Draft naming convention l.jpg

Draft naming convention

  • Drafts and redlines are .pdf files

  • Syntax:

    Draft <project>_<draft> [Redline [Compared to <project>_<draft>]].pdf

  • Examples:

  • Draft P802.11n_D8.0.pdf

  • Draft P802.11n_D8.0 Redline.pdf

  • Draft P802.11n_D7.04 Redline Compared to P802.11n_D7.03.pdf

    Please use this convention for all drafts posted on the 802.11 website.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 17 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Slide20 l.jpg

AOB

  • Nancy: participant lists. TGn, r, y all different.

    • How do we define contributor list?

    • Is second list, all letter balloters, or 802.11 members, or sponsor balloters?

    • Michelle: every group does it differently.

    • Nancy: defer to chair

  • Necati: any update on templates?

    • Michelle: need to do another update with new frontmatter (new board members)

    • Issues with numbering of pages.

    • Action: Necati email to Michelle list of issues.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 18 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Archive material l.jpg

Archive Material

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 19 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Publication work plan note to be included in the editor s operations manual l.jpg

Publication Work PlanNote: to be included in the editor’s operations manual

Here is the workflow we have used for a number of years with IEEE staff on publication of 802.11 publications: 

  • Editors provide FRAME source and any freestanding graphics (Powerpoint, Visio. TIF) to staff at time of REVCOM submission.

  • Editors provide a list of requests editorial corrections no later than REVCOM approval date.

  • Staff prepares a publication draft and highlights changes they have made and questions they need addressed or confirmed. This draft is sent to Task Group Editor and the Working Group Technical Editor (me). This typically occurs about 2-3 weeks after approval for publication, since the preparation work is usually (but not always) begun ahead of approval. This is also typically the draft peer reviewed by IEEE staff.

  • The Task Group Editor responds to all questions on domain specific questions, with copy to Working Group editor (me). This typically takes about 3-5 days.

  • The Working Group Technical Editor reviews responses from the Task Group editor, completes any responses, and provides a list of WG officers and voting members valid for the document as of the opening day of the Sponsor ballot. This typically only takes one additional day from the prior step as most of the work is done in parallel by the two editors.

  • Final draft is submitted by the IEEE staff to Working Group Technical Editor and Task Group Editor for sign-off. Any changes from the responses or IEEE peer review are highlighted and explained. This typically takes only one or two days more after the responses are received from the editors.

  • Task Group Editor gives final approval. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours.

  • Working Group Technical Editor signs off and provides draft to Working Group Chair. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours and in parallel with the previous step.

  • Working Group Chair sends email to sponsor and IEEE staff letting them know the Working Group has signed off on the publication process.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 20 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Terry cole on changes to mib elements l.jpg

Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements

  • You can incrementally add to a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is, add new values and meaning pairs.

  • You can change the description of a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is add new text clarifying or even changing the meaning of the element to keep up with the standard.

  • I would advise deprecation when changing the definition of some value of a MIB from one thing to another. However, I don't know of any rules requiring this.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 21 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Publications lessons learned l.jpg

Publications: lessons learned

  • When quoting baseline text inaccurately, the baseline text is changed whether or not the changes were marked. The IEEE staff will actually do the appropriate changes as if the task group had actually intended to change the baseline.

    • Drafts can minimally quote baseline text to minimize such changes

    • Should revisit the decision to include full context during insertion

  • Full Annex titles have to be shown in the amendment; more importantly included “normative” vs. “informative”

    • TGk inadvertently changed Annex A to be fully informative

    • TGr battled to fix Annex A but caused ripples

    • TGy 08-1215r1 has brief review of significant things changed for publication

    • In editor’s operations manual and during balloting, should comment that Annexes should be fully titled with good reason to vote “No” in balloting

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 22 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Publications lessons learned cont d l.jpg

Publications: lessons learned (cont’d)

  • Acronym rules are inconsistent

    • Styleguide doesn’t include definitions

    • Every document is treated as standalone, thus first acronym reference must be spelled out. Even though, other amendments or baseline may have defined and used the acronym earlier.

    • Goal should be to have as few changes between the final balloted amendment and final published amendment.

  • How do we deal with subjective decisions made by the IEEE copy editors as their styles vary?

  • Booleans should be capitalized: TRUE and FALSE

    • when “set to”

  • Booleans should be lower case: is true and is false (raise the issue with Style Guide update)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 23 of 11-09/0322r1 by Adrian Stephens (Intel Corporation)


Closing report l.jpg

Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-13

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0367r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


Abstract27 l.jpg

Abstract

Closing report for Wireless Next Generation (WNG) Standing Committee (SC) for March 2009, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0367r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


Slide28 l.jpg

Presentations

  • 11-09-0315-01-0wng-enhanced-security.ppt [Dan Harkins]

    • StrawPoll: A study group to develop a PAR and Five Criteria for Enhanced Security for 802.11 should be created.

    • Yes: 11, No: 1, Don’t know, Need more information:11, Don’t care: 6.

  • 11-09-0338-00-0wng-enhancement-of-802-11-ad-hoc-mode.ppt [Chiu Ngo]

    • StrawPoll: Should IEEE 802.11 WNG receive further presentations on the topic of performance improvement for IEEE 802.11 ad hoc mode?

    • Yes: 10, No: 1, Abstain: 14

  • 11-09-0337-00-0wng-802-next-generation-security.ppt [Richard Paine]

    Discussion Point

  • 11-09-0239-02-0wng-comments-on-802-22-input-to-08-260-petition-for-reconsideration.doc

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0367r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


Arc mar 09 summary report l.jpg

ARC Mar ‘09 Summary Report

  • Jan -> Mar:

    • Continued MAC breakdown work

      • 3 tele confs extended model;

      • Shifting from component to functional orientation

  • Mar F2F sessions

    • Advice request re MIBs

      • Usage and inconsistency issues

      • Possible recommendation in development re MIB usage & SAP sequence data flows

        • Proposal: Classification of mib vars into

          • capability, status, control knob, “confused/mixed perceptions”

          • Internal/external to an entity

    • MAC Functional Model Status

      • Updated snapshot in 9/118 “r latest” (will be updated after this week)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0333r1 by David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.


Arc planning for mar may l.jpg

ARC Planning for Mar -> May

Conf Calls

Mar 31 18:00-19:00 ET

Apr 14, Apr 28, 13:00-14:00 ET

Next F2F sessions in May In Montreal

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0333r1 by David Bagby, Calypso Ventures, Inc.


March 2009 closing report for tgmb l.jpg

March 2009 Closing Report for TGmb

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-12

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Abstract32 l.jpg

Abstract

Closing report for TGmb for March 2009 plenary meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Tgmb status l.jpg

TGmb Status

(Yes, we found an editor…)

Photo credit: Ted Percival (tedpercival on Flickr); used with permission

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tedpercival/2621455898/

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Accomplishments l.jpg

Accomplishments

  • Elected Adrian Stephens as Technical Editor

    • Disbursed US$2.25 collected in fines for use of the word “editor”

    • Adopted proposed editorial process

  • Adopted new plan of record (see next slide)

  • Continued processing comment spreadsheet

    • Discussed multi-BSS operation and power save

  • Note: no interpretation requests were received

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Tgmb plan of record l.jpg

TGmb Plan of Record

  • May 2008 – Issue Call for Comment/Input

  • July 2008 – begin process input and old Interpretation requests

    Acknowledge previous Task Group referrals

  • Sept 2008 – PAR revision process started

  • Nov 2008 – close receipt of new input

  • Nov 2008 – WG/EC approval of PAR Revision

  • Dec 2008 – NesCom/SASB approval PAR Revision

  • May 2009 – First WG Letter ballot

    • (includes All published Amendments as of May 2009)

  • Sep/Nov 2009 – Recirc start

  • November 2009– Form Sponsor Pool

  • January 2010 – Sponsor Ballot Start

    • (Include all published amendments as of Jan 2010)

  • May 2010 – Sponsor Recirc

  • Jan 2011 – WG/EC Final Approval (conditional in Nov 2010)

  • Mar 2011 – RevCom/SASB Approval

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Plans for may meeting and beyond l.jpg

Plans for May Meeting and Beyond

  • Goal: Letter ballot after May 2009 meeting in Montréal

  • Teleconferences planned to work on remaining open issues

    • Schedule and topics to be announced after WG approval of teleconferences

  • TGmb editorial team is still seeking reviewers to assist in checking draft changes

    • See 11-09/0250r0 for process and time requirements

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Documents l.jpg

Documents

  • Agenda: 11-09/0341r1

  • Minutes: 11-09/0325r0

  • Current issues list: 11-08/1127r13

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0407r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks


Tgn closing report vancouver bc canada 802 plenary l.jpg

TGn Closing Report Vancouver, BC, Canada 802 Plenary

Date: 2009-03-13

Authors:

Name

Company

Address

Phone

email

5488 Marvell Lane,

Santa Clara, CA, 95054

+1 (321)427-4098

bkraemer@

marvell

.com

Bruce Kraemer

Marvell

sli@sibeam.com

Sheung Li

SiBEAM

+1 (408)245-3120

555 Mathilda Ave,

Sunnyvale, CA 94085

15 JJ Thompson

+1 (503)616-3800

adrian.p.stephens@intel.com

Adrian Stephens

Intel Corporation

Avenue, Cambridge,

CB3 0FD, UK

from slide 1 of 11-09/0412r2 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell


Sponsor ballot recirculation 1 on tgn l.jpg

Sponsor Ballot Recirculation #1 on TGn

Sponsor recirculation ballot closed March 07 and passed with a 80.1% affirmative vote (169 approve, 42 not approve, 17 abstain)

77 comments received

During March meeting, All comments resolved, and editor empowered to create TGn Draft 9.0 for further balloting

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0412r2 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell


Tgn primary march meeting documents l.jpg

TGn - Primary March Meeting Documents

SB #1 Comment Composite11-09- 0024 r5

Meeting Report 11-09- 0219 r10

Editors Report 11-09- 0251 r1

Closing Report11-09- 0412 r0

Meeting Minutes 11-09- 0326 r0

TGn Draft 8.0

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0412r2 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell


Mar 09 to may 09 tgn teleconference plan l.jpg

Mar ’09 to May ‘09 TGn Teleconference Plan

Call number: 916-356-2663

Call time: 11:00 – 13:00 ET

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0412r2 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell


Tgn timeline is unchanged l.jpg

TGn Timeline is Unchanged

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0412r2 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell


Tgp closing report l.jpg

TGp Closing Report

Date: 2009-03-13

Author:

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


Abstract44 l.jpg

Abstract

TGp closing report for March 2009 meetings

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


March 2009 tgp meetings summary l.jpg

March 2009 TGp Meetings Summary

All LB# 141 Comment resolutions completed (many revisited with altered resolutions this week as a result of CRs)

Original LB# 141 comments received:

221 comments, 83 were editorial

6 two-hour time slots this week plus Monday 1.5 hour ad-hoc slot

Current working draft is D5.02

Voted to go to WG recirculation ballot

Presentation in doc: 11-09/0395r1 was made regarding a WAVE ITS Station Technical Capabilities Summary

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


Status l.jpg

Status

Current draft D5.02 is on server

Master Comment Resolution document 11-08-1452r6

Represents LB# 141 CR changes from D5.0

Plan to go to 2nd recirculation WG letter ballot

Weekly teleconferences planned for every Thursday @ 15:00 ET - Piscataway time (commencing after letter ballot results are received, if 2nd recirculation LB approved by WG)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


Tgp timeline update l.jpg

TGp Timeline Update

Note:

  • March 2009 session changes shown in Red on above chart

  • N/C = No Change

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


Tgp motion to start 2 nd recirculation wg lb l.jpg

TGp Motion to start 2ndRecirculation WG LB

Motion:

  • Having approved comment resolutions for all of the comments received from LB# 141 on 802.11 TGp Draft 5.0 as contained in document 11-08-1452-06-000p (TGp Comment Resolutions),

  • Instruct the editor to prepare Draft 6.0 incorporating these resolutions and,

  • Approve a 15 day Working Group Recirculation Ballot asking the question “Should P802.11 TGp Draft 6.0 be forwarded to Sponsor Ballot?”

    Moved by Stuart J. Kerry on behalf of TGp

    TGp vote:

    Moved: Alastair Malarky, Seconded: Wayne Fisher, Result: 8-0-1

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0258r1 by Stuart J. Kerry (OK-Brit)


Tgs vancouver closing report l.jpg

TGs Vancouver Closing Report

Date: 2009-03-12

Authors:

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


Abstract50 l.jpg

Abstract

Report of TGs, Mesh Networking Task Group, to the March 2009 (Vancouver, British Columbia) 802.11 Closing Plenary.

TGs Motto: Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add but when there is nothing left to take away.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


Tgs closing plenary report l.jpg

TGs Closing Plenary Report

TGs has achieved its goals for this meeting of (1) completing resolution of all comments on its Draft D2.0 from LB #126 and (2) voting to go to Letter Ballot again.

The current TGs comment resolution spread sheet is 11-08/493r43 and shows the resolution of all comments.

Sony Corporation has agreed to continue sponsorship of Kazuyuki Sakoda as TGs temporary Editor through the end of 2009.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


Tgs closing plenary report52 l.jpg

TGs Closing Plenary Report

TGs requests a 15 day procedural Letter Ballot to approve going to Working Group Letter Ballot with Draft D3.0.

TGs requests Working Group approval for an ad hoc meeting Sunday, 10 May, in Montreal, Quebec, to work on comment resolution.

TGs is holding teleconferences some Wednesdays through the July Plenary at 10:00 for up to 1 ½ hours. Dates: 6 May, 27 May, 10 June, 24 June, 8 July

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


Tgs closing plenary report53 l.jpg

TGs Closing Plenary Report

An annotated agenda for TGs at this meeting is available in 11-09/205r13. The draft minutes will be posted shortly as 11-09/312r0.

Goal for the May 2009 TGs meeting in Montreal, Quebec:

Start resolving new Letter Ballot comments.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


End of report l.jpg

End of Report

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0365r0 by Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola


Closing report55 l.jpg

Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-13

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0366r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


Abstract56 l.jpg

Abstract

Closing report for TGu Interworking with External Networks for March 2009, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0366r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


Slide57 l.jpg

  • Re-circulation Letter Ballot 142 progress

    • Resolved all comments this week

    • 10 submissions

    • Ask WG for a 15 day re-circulation letter ballot

  • Teleconferences

    • 15th April 20091hr11 ET

    • 22nd April20091hr11 ET

    • 29th April20092hr11 ET

    • 6th May 20092hr11 ET

  • Liaison

    • Reply to 3GPP CT1 regarding TGu elements for ANDSF (Access Network Discovery and Selection Function)

  • Plans for May 2009

    • LB comment resolutions

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0366r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM


March 2009 closing report l.jpg

March 2009 Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-12

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Abstract59 l.jpg

Abstract

This document contains the TGv closing report for March 2009.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Goals and accomplishments l.jpg

Goals and Accomplishments

  • Comment resolution from LB 140

    • Completed resolution of LB 140 comments

  • Letter Ballot

  • Acknowledgements

    • Thanks to David Goodall, for serving as secretary

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Comment processing summary l.jpg

Comment Processing Summary

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Documents for 08 1467 comment resolution l.jpg

Documents for 08/1467 comment resolution

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Output documents l.jpg

Output Documents

  • 11-09-0399-00-000v-TGv-March-2009-closing-report.ppt

  • 11-09-0215-07-000v-March-2009-agenda.ppt

  • 11-09-0400-00-000v-March 2009 meeting notes

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Motion l.jpg

Motion

  • Having approved comment resolutions for all of the comments received from LB140 on TGv Draft 4.0, instruct the editor to prepare Draft 5.0 incorporating these resolutions and

  • Approve a 15 day Working Group Recirculation Ballot asking the question “Should TGv Draft 5.0 be forwarded to Sponsor Ballot?”

  • Mover: Allan Thomson

  • Seconder: Qi Wang

  • Result: 5-0-0

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Tgv timeline updated sept 2008 l.jpg

TGv Timeline – Updated Sept, 2008

  • Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: July 07 – completed

    • Jan 08 – D2.0, May 08 – D3.0

  • Re-circulation Working Group Letter Ballot: November 08 (D4.0)

    • Mar 09 – D5.0, May 09 – D 6.0, July 09 – D7.0, D7.0(unchanged)

  • Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: June 09

  • Initial Sponsor Ballot: Sept 09

    • Sept 09 – D7.0

  • Approved Sponsor Ballot: Nov 09

    • Nov 09 – D8.0, Jan 09 - D9.0, Feb D10.0, March D11.0

    • May 12th ( or so) for Revcom June Approval

  • Final WG/EC Approval: July 2010

  • RevCom/Standards Board Approval: June 4th/June 5th(or so)

  • Note: TGv PAR is authorized through Dec 2010

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 8 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Goals for may 2009 l.jpg

Goals for May 2009

  • Comment resolution

  • Recirculation Letter Ballot

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 9 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


References l.jpg

References

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 10 of 11-09/0399r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks)


Ieee 802 11 tgw march closing report l.jpg

IEEE 802.11 TGw March Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-11

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Abstract69 l.jpg

Abstract

This presentation contains the closing report for the March 2009 meeting of IEEE 802.11 TGw

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


March meeting objectives l.jpg

March Meeting Objectives

  • March Meeting Objectives

    • Schedule Teleconferences

    • Discuss Public Action frames issue

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Accomplishments71 l.jpg

Accomplishments

  • Voted to rescind decision to initiate a Sponsor Ballot recirculation for P802.11w D8.0

    • The resolution adopted in D8 breaks P802.11n Coexistence Management

    • Due to conflicting requirements on Public Action frames from different task groups

  • Appear to reach a tentative consensus resolution of the Public Action Frame issue:

    • 802.11w should create no problems for 802.11n for unicast Public Action frames, as protection is not required between two STAs for which a security association does not exist. Resolution: clarify the P802.11w draft.

    • It is the intent of TGw that broadcast unprotected Management frames with a wildcard BSSID will be received. Resolution: clarify the P802.11w draft.

    • The rules for setting the BSSID field of the Public Action frame may require work in TGn. For example, setting it to the transmitters BSSID probably doesn’t work. The rules for receiving and filtering Public Action frames based on the BSSID field need to be clarified. Resolution: TGn to clarify the P802.11n draft

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Submissions l.jpg

Submissions

  • 11-09/386r1 – Open report and agenda

  • 11-09/388r0 – Meeting Minutes (Peter Yee)

  • 11-09/406 – Closing Report

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Teleconferences l.jpg

Teleconferences

  • For 1 hour, on Wednesdays at 12:00 ET, through 1 week past the IEEE 802.11 May 2009 Interim Meeting except for:

    • March 23

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Motion74 l.jpg

Motion

  • Motion: Move that the recirculation of P802.11w D8.0 be rescinded

  • Mover: Allan Thomson

  • Seconder: Stephen McCann

  • Result: 9-1-0, motion passes

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


May meeting planning l.jpg

May Meeting Planning

  • Objectives

    • Comment Resolution for Recirculation Sponsor Ballot

  • Conference Call(s)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 8 of 11-09/0406r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Tgz vancouver closing report l.jpg

TGz Vancouver Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-13

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0415r0 by Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm)


Tgz accomplishments l.jpg

TGz Accomplishments

  • TGz generated proposed resolutions for 68% of the LB143 comments

    • The resolutions are in 11-09-0313-01-000z

    • 51 comments left (41 technical)

  • Special thanks to Yongho Seok for filling in as the secretary this week!

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0415r0 by Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm)


Tgz goals for montreal l.jpg

TGz Goals for Montreal

  • The goal for Montreal is to continue to work on LB143 comment resolution

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0415r0 by Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm)


802 11aa robust audio video transport streaming vancouver british columbia closing report l.jpg

802.11aa – Robust Audio Video Transport Streaming Vancouver, British Columbia Closing Report

Date: 2009-03-12

Authors:

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Abstract80 l.jpg

Abstract

This submission summarizes TGaa the activities of TGaa in the IEEE 802.11 Vancouver Session (March 2009).

Slide 80

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Slide81 l.jpg

Recognition

Alex Ashley – for volunteering to be TGaa secretary for the entire week.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Slide82 l.jpg

Snapshot

  • Since the Los Angeles session:

    • 2 Teleconferences focused on (a) OBSS and (b) Reliable Multicast.

  • Goals for the Vancouver Session:

    • OBSS

      • Adopt formal definition of OBSS for TGaa

      • Listen, review and adopt OBSS solution into the TGaa draft

    • Listen, review, down select and adopt Reliable Multicast mechanism(s) into TGaa draft

    • Jointly meet with 802.1AVB:

      • Discuss 802.11 specific input to DMN specification

      • Discuss viability of the ‘drop precedence’ idea

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Slide83 l.jpg

What we did this week?

  • OBSS

    • Listened to four presentations on OBSS in the context of TGaa

    • Started discussions on a strategy and plan for OBSS

  • Reliable Multicast

    • Reviewed the harmonized set of Reliable Multicast mechanism(s)

    • Listened to 2 additional proposals on reliable multicast

    • Adopted harmonized Reliable Multicast mechanism(s) into TGaa draft

  • Joint Meeting with 802.1AVB

    • How to accommodate SRP in 802.11?

    • Strategies for priority levels, precedence levels and drop precedence

  • Teleconference schedule

  • Minutes from the session are in document 09//371r0

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Plans for the montreal may 2009 session l.jpg

Plans for the Montreal (May 2009) Session

In upcoming teleconferences

Layout a OBSS strategy and plan

MRG discussions

Additional mechanisms for Reliable Multicast

Address other topics from TGaa PAR

Plans for May ‘09 (Montreal) Meeting

Continue activities from teleconferences

Technical presentations on TGaa PAR topics

Review and improve TGaa draft

Slide 84

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Teleconferences85 l.jpg

Teleconferences

Bi-weekly on Mondays between 1100-1230Hrs ET, starting March 23rd 2009 till July 27th, 2009.

Schedule will be announced in the TGaa reflector soon.

Slide 85

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Slide86 l.jpg

Background details

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 8 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Technical presentations l.jpg

Technical Presentations

Distributed Channel Assignment 09/285r0 Andrew Myles

OBSS Analysis of Channel Requirements 08/1470r4 Graham Smith

Overlapping BSS Proposal 09/230r0 Graham Smith

OBSS OSQAP QoS Issues 09/347r0 Graham Smith

Efficient Error Control Using Network Coding for Multicast Transmission 09/277r0 Kevin Rhee

Feedback-jamming Multicast ARQ 09/.290r0 Jochen Miroll

Quasi-reliable Multicast 09/247r0 Jochen Miroll

More Reliable GroupCast Proposal Present 09/340r0 Hang Liu

Drop Precedence in wireless, wired-wireless networks* 09/264r0 Alex Ashley

AVB DMN and 802.11 09/0403r0 Philippe Klein

Group addressed normative text 08/1244r2

* Discussed at the joint meeting with 802.1AVB

Slide 87

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 9 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


What is obss l.jpg

What is OBSS?

OBSS Definitions:

OBSS edge -- Any two APs operating in the same channel and can hear each other (either directly or via a STA associated to one of the APs)

OBSS Graph – is a graph where APs are nodes of the graph and the edges are OBSS edges and every AP with in the OBSS graph can be connected via one or more OBSS APs to every other AP in the OBSS graph

Length(OBSS graph) – longest shortest path between any two APs in the OBSS graph

Size(OBSS graph) – number of nodes (APs) in the OBSS graph

Scope of TGaa OBSS Solution (proposed in Los Angeles session) –

if length(OBSS graph) <= 2 and the size(OBSS graph) <=3 , enable the OBSS QAP solution otherwise (a) backoff to legacy (non .11aa) mode or (b) use a different solution

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 10 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Issues with the scope of obss solution l.jpg

Issues with the scope of OBSS solution?

Length (OBSS graph) <= 2 is insufficient?

2.4GHz band has only 3 channels and suffers in OBSS environment. It is not in the scope of TGaa OBSS solution

If the number of channels is > 17, a length of greater than 2 is improbable

A length of 7 or 8 is common in dense deployments if the number of available channels is limited 9 or 11. This condition could be mitigated by having the QAPs fall back from 40MHz to 20MHz channels. Should TGaa specify a mechanism for this?

Is a mechanism/solution that only addresses the scope as defined acceptable (despite the fact that consistent performance will not be met) as an incremental step over legacy?

If a length of 7 or 8 is accepted to be the scope of the solution, it is not any simpler than the general OBSS problem (which is considered NP-Hard)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 11 of 11-09/0384r1 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel Corporation


Tgac march 2009 closing report l.jpg

TGac March 2009 Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-12

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


Abstract91 l.jpg

Abstract

This document is the closing report for the TGac for the March 2009 session

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


Submissions92 l.jpg

Submissions

  • 09/0305r0, “TGac Status and Timeline” Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks

  • 09/0161r2, “Usage Models”, Rolf De Vegt, Qualcomm

  • 09/0059r3, “Proposed Selection Procedure”, Rolf De Vegt, Qualcomm

  • 09/0306, “Proposal Regarding .11ac Evaluation approach”, Rolf De Vegt, Qualcomm

  • 09/307r1,” Evaluation of AoD and AoA for TGac Channel Models”, Hemanth Sampath, Qualcomm

  • 09/364r0, “Comments on AOA and AOD Selection for a Multi-User SDMA Network”, JT Chen, Ralink Technology

  • 09/308r1, “TGac Channel Model Addendum Document”, Hemanth Sampath, Qualcomm

  • 09/309r1, “TGac Channel Model Addendum Document Highlights”, Hemanth Sampath, Qualcomm

  • 09/308r1, “TGac Channel Model Addendum Document”, Hemanth Sampath, Qualcomm

  • 09/345r0, “Indoor Channel Measurements for TGac ”, Minho Cheong, ETRI

  • 09/343r0, “W-PAN Structures Inside an OFDMA/SDMA W-LAN ”, JT Chen, Ralink Technology

  • 09/0303r0, “Effect of SDMA in IEEE 802.11ac”, Naoki Honma, Kentaro Nishimori, Riichi Kudo, Yasushi Takatori (NTT)

  • 09/0304r0, “TGac Functional Requirements”, Peter Loc, Ralink and Minho Cheong, ETRI

  • 09/0376, “Proposal for TGac Evaluation Methodology”, Minho Cheong and Peter Loc

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


Work completed l.jpg

Work Completed

  • Election of two Vice Chairs

    • Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm)

    • Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)

  • Two TG motions passed

    • Accept 09-059r4 as the TGac baseline document for the selection procedure

    • Accept 09-0161r4 as the TGac baseline document for usage models

  • Channel Models

    • Number of contributions related to channel models were presented

    • More work is needed before the TG accept a channel model baseline document.

    • Work is to continue on conference calls

  • Functional Requirements

    • Agreed to include comparison criteria and simulation scenarios in the functional requirements document

    • Work is to continue on conference calls

  • Specification Framework

    • No relevant submissions.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


March 2009 goals l.jpg

March 2009 Goals

  • Functional Requirements

    • Continue the functional Requirement discussion with the aim to have a first draft available by March.

  • Channel Models

    • Continue the discussion on the channel models.

    • Converge the different views on the channel models.

  • Specification Framework

    • Initial view on the outline of the document

  • Selection Procedure

    • Continue to refine the selection procedure described as needed

  • Usage Models

    • Continue to refine usage models as needed.

  • Technical Submissions

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


Conference call times l.jpg

Conference Call Times

  • Bi-Weekly, alternating with TGad

  • March 26

    • 11:00 – 13:00 ET

  • April 9

    • 20:00 -22:00 ET

  • April 23

    • 11:00 – 13:00 ET

  • May 7

    • 20:00 – 22:00 ET

  • Possible Topics

    • Channel Models

    • Functional Requirements

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0409r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd, Nortel Networks


Tgad march 2009 closing report l.jpg

TGad March 2009 Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-03-13

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0410r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation


Abstract97 l.jpg

Abstract

This document is the closing report for the TGad for the March 2009 plenary session.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0410r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation


Work completed98 l.jpg

Work Completed

  • Task Group document development

    • TGad Functional Requirements, 09/0228r1, Eldad Perahia

    • TGad Channel Model Requirements, 09/0323r0, Vinko Erceg

    • TGad Evaluation Methodology, 09/0296r1, Eldad Perahia

  • Channel Modeling

    • Deterministic Channel Modeling for 60 GHz WLAN, 09/302r0, Martin Jacob

    • Channel Models for 60 GHz WLAN Systems, 09/336r0 & 09/334r0, Alexander Maltsev

  • Joint 802.15.3c/TGad meeting

    • Common mode signaling (CMS) for intersystem coexistence enhancement, 09/0370r0, Shu Kato

    • IEEE 802.15.3c DEV sync frame transmission for adjacent piconet coexistence, 09/0372r1, Zhou Lan

    • Tg3c beamforming overview, 11-09/0355r1, Ismail Lakkis

    • Introduction of TG3c channel model and beyond, 11-09/0375r1, Hirokazu Sawada

    • Review of TG3c Coexistence Assurance Document, James P. F. Gilb

      • 15-09/0022r8, CA document

      • 15-09/0184r1, response to 802.19 comments

      • 15-09/0078r1, changes to CA document

  • Technical submission

    • Implication of usage models on TGad network architecture, 09/0391r0, Carlos Cordeiro

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0410r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation


Goals for may l.jpg

Goals for May

  • Continue working on task group documents

    • Motion initial draft of functional requirements & evaluation methodology

  • Technical contributions

  • Joint meeting w/ 802.15.3c

    • TGad responses to March 802.15.3c presentations

    • (suggested activities from minutes of March 15.3c/TGad joint meeting)

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0410r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation


Conference call times100 l.jpg

Conference call times

  • Bi-weekly, alternate with TGac

  • April 2 –

    • 11:00-13:00 ET

    • Channel modeling

  • April 16 -

    • 20:00-22:00 ET

    • Channel modeling

  • April 30 –

    • 11:00-13:00 ET

    • Task group documents

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0410r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation


Jtc1 ad hoc january 2009 closing report l.jpg

JTC1 Ad Hoc January 2009 Closing Report

Authors:

Date: 2009-10-20

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 1 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Abstract102 l.jpg

Abstract

This presentation summarizes the March 2009 meeting of the IEEE 802.11 JTC1 Ad Hoc.

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 2 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Jtc1 march meeting goals l.jpg

JTC1 March Meeting Goals

  • Meeting Objectives for Vancouver

    • Complete and ratify liaison letter: 11-09/0168 “Response to Liaison Letter 6N13770 from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 WG1 to the IEEE 802 LMSC”

    • Develop response to 11-09/207r0, 11-09/208r0, and 11-09/209r0

    • Decide whether to progress 802.11-2007 to fast track

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 3 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Accomplishments and decisions l.jpg

Accomplishments and Decisions

  • Decided to follow advice from IEEE staff to defer progressing IEEE 802.11-2007 to ISO/IEC fast track ballot

    • IEEE staff and ISO negotiating issues with PSDO

  • Completed 11-09/0168 “Response to Liaison Letter 6N13770 from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 WG1 to the IEEE 802 LMSC” and requesting 802.11 WG to forward to EC for approval

  • Completed 11-09/0351r1, “Response to liaison request to the IEEE 802 LMSC from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 WG1 to review documents 6N13774, 6N13775, and 6N13776”

  • Began forming WG position for the June 2009 SC6 Meeting in Tokyo

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 4 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Documents105 l.jpg

Documents

  • 11-09/0350r1 – Agenda and Opening Report

  • 11-09/404r0 – Meeting Minutes

  • 11-09/168r6 – Liaison letter from P. Nikolich/EC responding to request from SC6

  • 11-09/351r1 – Liaison letter from IEEE 802.11 Task Group reiterating WG position of 11-08/1166

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 5 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Motion106 l.jpg

Motion

  • Motion: Move to forward doc. 11-09/0168r6, the liaison letter “Response to Liaison Letter 6N13770 from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 WG1 to the IEEE 802 LMSC”, to the IEEE 802 LMSC Executive Committee for its approval

  • Mover: Donald Eastlake III

  • Seconder: Peter Yee

  • Result: 4-0-0, motion passes

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 6 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


Motion107 l.jpg

Motion

  • Motion: Move to send doc. 11-09/0351r1, a liaison letter to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group, “Response to liaison request to the IEEE 802 LMSC from ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 WG1 to review documents 6N13774, 6N13775, and 6N13776”

  • Mover: Peter Yee

  • Seconder: Donald Eastlake III

  • Result: 4-0-0, motion passes

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 7 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


May meeting planning108 l.jpg

May Meeting Planning

  • Objectives

    • Develop positions for June SC6 meeting

Adrian Stephens, Intel Corporation

from slide 8 of 11-09/0405r0 by Jesse Walker, Intel Corporation


  • Login