1 / 13

Coexistence in Licensed Bands Issues & Methodologies

Coexistence in Licensed Bands Issues & Methodologies. IEEE 802.19 Meeting May 2004 Joanne Wilson Reza Arefi Joanne@arraycomm.com reza.arefi@ieee.org. Status of Coexistence Studies in IEEE 802. Unlicensed 802.15.2 produced coexistence guidelines

anne-cash
Download Presentation

Coexistence in Licensed Bands Issues & Methodologies

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Coexistence in Licensed BandsIssues & Methodologies IEEE 802.19 Meeting May 2004 Joanne Wilson Reza Arefi Joanne@arraycomm.com reza.arefi@ieee.org Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  2. Status of Coexistence Studies in IEEE 802 • Unlicensed • 802.15.2 produced coexistence guidelines • 802.19 TAG was formed to address unlicensed band coexistence between wireless 802 projects • Licensed • 802.16.2 produced a Recommended Practice (and its revision) to address intra-802.16 licensed band coexistence • Very limited scope • No definition of coexistence is provided • 802.20 • Coexistence CG was formed in July 2003 • The WG voted to hold off on Coexistence work in November 2003 Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  3. Licensed bands • 802 projects for licensed bands (802.16 and 802.20) deal with metropolitan/wide area networks with multi-cell deployments • Coexistence with geographical and/or spectral neighbors is key to successful deployments in licensed bands • Objective is to create guidelines for preventing from harmful interference by determining levels of permissible, or acceptable, interference • Interference environment varies with deployment scenarios Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  4. Deployment Scenarios • Deployments could be under nation-wide licenses • Deployments are likely to have multiple operators with potentially different systems : • in the same service area • In adjacent service areas (domestic as well as international) • Deployments in or adjacent to bands already used for commercial services are also likely • Cellular, PCS, 3G, Radar, P-P links, broadcast • No shared environment • Co-channel in adjacent areas, or • Adjacent channel in same area, but • No co-channel in same area Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  5. Specifics • From regulatory point-of-view, licensed co-channel operation in the same geographical area would not be allowed • Cognitive Radios? • Possibilities • Co-channel across service boundary: geographical neighbors • Adjacent channel within same service/geographic area: spectral neighbors • Neighbor could be non-802.xx or same 802.xx but of a different duplex • It could be assumed that geographical and spectral neighbors of the same duplex have much easier time coexisting with each other with reasonable coordination • frame synchronization, power at service boundary, etc. Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  6. 802.xx TDD Lower neighbor Lower neighbor Upper neighbor Upper neighbor 802.xx FDD 802.xx FDD Middle neighbor(s) Spectral Neighbors, Same Area • 802.xx systems may need to coordinate with spectral neighbors • The number and the nature of spectral neighbors TDD and FDD systems may need to coordinate with are not necessarily the same Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  7. System System 1 2 Blue: intended Red: interference Service boundary Geographical Neighbors, Same Frequency • Service areas for licensed spectrum typically don’t overlap, but exceptions do exist • Protection, in Service Rules, is typically through power limit at service boundary, which may or may not be sufficient • Interference scenarios (general) • Base-Base • Sub-Sub • Base-Sub • Sub-Base Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  8. f f TDD-FDD Issues • Coexisting of FDD systems (co- or adj-channel) • Base-Sub • Sub-Base • For TDD-FDD or unsynchronized TDD-TDD case: • Examination of Base-Base and Sub-Sub scenarios are also required • Safe distance needs to be determined Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  9. Service Rules • For each band, out-of-band emissions and service boundary levels are specified by regulatory authorities as Service Rules • Implementations of 802.xx in each band should adopt these values to comply with the rules unless shown to be inappropriate, where more stringent levels should be used • Example, service providers are voluntarily using tighter specifications than the rules require in the PCS band • Receiver performance, including filters, are typically not specified by the regulators • Assumptions on these are, however, required to perform coexistence analyses • Interference temperature? Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  10. Methodology • Pick a few “primary candidate” bands • Perform simulations using typical equipment specifications • Requires feedback from the WG on parameters such as TX power, RX thresholds for various modulation schemes, ACS, ACLR, etc. • Needs network of cells, e.g. two tiers, with users distributed throughout the cell coverage areas Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  11. Methodology • Given PHY parameters and appropriate path loss models, links to every user is being set up incorporating power control loops, burst profile (mod/coding class) as dictated by SINR conditions, etc. • A snapshot of impact of interference on a victim (Base or Sub) is then captured • Impact on outage • Impact on capacity (throughput) • The process is then repeated many times to reveal the statistics of interference Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  12. Methodology • Sample CDF plot Outage threshold Interference threshold : Safe area (acceptable interference) Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

  13. Methodology • If following the Service Rules does not provide for adequate protection, then recommend new guidelines through: • Determine “safe” geographical and/or spectral distance between the two potentially interfering systems for acceptable operation under the Service Rules • Determine TX/RX parameters that enable “safe” operation in geographical and/or spectral adjacency Joanne Wilson & Reza Arefi

More Related