1 / 21

IEEE 802.11 Regulatory SC DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team Overview of Straw Poll Results

IEEE 802.11 Regulatory SC DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team Overview of Straw Poll Results. Date: 2015-02-27. Authors:. Abstract.

annunziata
Download Presentation

IEEE 802.11 Regulatory SC DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team Overview of Straw Poll Results

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. IEEE 802.11 Regulatory SCDSRC Coexistence Tiger TeamOverview of Straw Poll Results Date: 2015-02-27 Authors: Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  2. Abstract Preliminary results of Straw Poll questions, which will be incorporated into the final report of the IEEE 802.11 (Regulatory Standing Committee) DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team Note: There may be some slight differences between the wording in the online (Survey Monkey) questions and the wording in these slides. The changes were strictly editorial. Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  3. Straw poll question #1 Objective of the Tiger Team: “Create a document that describes and quantifies possible coexistence mechanisms between DSRC and extensions of the 802.11 base standard in the proposed UNII-4 band, if the FCC allows such band sharing in a future R&O.” Do you believe it is technically feasible to protect DSRC systems from harmful interference if unlicensed (Part 15) devices share the 5.9 GHz band? • Yes • No • Needs more study • No opinion Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  4. Q1 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  5. Straw poll question #2 Regarding the proposal in document 13/994r0 by Peter Ecclesine of Cisco Systems https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-0994-00-0reg-proposal-for-u-nii-4-devices.docx Do you believe this proposed band sharing technique has merit and, after developing a more complete definition and field testing, should be considered a basis for a band sharing solution? • Yes • No • Not enough information/needs more study • No opinion Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  6. Q2 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  7. Straw poll question #3 Regarding the proposal in document 13/1449r2 by Tevfik Yucek of Qualcomm (and others) https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1449-02-0reg-proposal-for-dsrc-band-coexistence.pptx http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022418821 Do you believe this proposed band sharing technique has merit and, after developing a more complete definition and field testing, should be considered a basis for a band sharing solution? • Yes • No • Not enough information/needs more study • No opinion Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  8. Q3 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  9. Straw poll question #4 Which proposal do you support for further specification development and field testing? • The 13/994r0 proposal by Ecclesine [1] • The 13/1449r2 proposal by Yucek [1] • I support a combination of both proposals with additional details added • I believe further study of both proposals independently is needed • Neither – I do not support any band sharing • While I support band sharing, I do not believe either approach can form the basis for an acceptable band sharing solution – we need something different Note 1: Both proposals will need additional development before field testing Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  10. Q4 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  11. Straw poll question #5 Would you support a Part 90/95 rule change to move the V2V Safety Channel (currently in Channel 172) to one of the upper channels (180, 182, or 184)? • Yes • No • Not enough information • I don’t support band sharing • No opinion Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  12. Q5 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  13. Straw poll question #6 • Would you support a proposal to use one of the upper channels (180/182/184) for V2V Safety Channel traffic instead of Channel 172? (No rule change. Part 95 still applies to Channel 172. Channel 172 would be shared with Part 15 devices) • Yes • No • Not enough information • I don’t support band sharing • No opinion Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  14. Q6 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  15. Straw poll question #7 • If band sharing is allowed, would you prefer that the upper edge of the U-NII4 band be at 5.925 GHz (all 75MHz) or 5.895 GHz (only the lower 45MHz)? • Only lower 45MHz • All 75MHz • No opinion • I do not support band sharing All 75MHz Lower 45MHz DSRC Band DSRC Channels 173 177 161 165 169 173 177 80MHz 80MHz Wi-Fi Channels 160MHz Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  16. Q7 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  17. Straw poll question #8 • If sharing is only allowed in the lower 45MHz portion of the band (5850-5895MHz), should DSRC only use 20MHz channels 173 and 177 in that shared portion of the band? (Note: Channels 172 & 178 in Part 95 are defined as 10MHz in bandwidth, so a rule change may be required. Channels 173 and 177 align with 11ac.) • Yes – only 20MHz DSRC channels in the shared band • No – DSRC should use only 10MHz channels • No opinion/Not enough information • I do not support band sharing Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  18. Q8 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  19. Straw poll question #9 If a Clear Channel Assessment approach is adopted as outlined in document 13/994r0 by Ecclesine, would unlicensed devices need to vacate the entire 5850-5925 MHz band after detecting a DSRC signal on any one channel within the band in order to avoid harmful interference? • Yes – unlicensed devices would need to vacate the entire shared band (5850-5925 MHz) after detecting a DSRC signal on one channel • No – unlicensed devices could still operate in other unoccupied parts of the shared band (5850-5925 MHz) after detecting DSRC signals on one or more channels • No opinion • I do not support band sharing Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  20. Q9 Results Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

  21. Conclusion • Total of 94 responses • Results will be rolled into Section 11 along with comments • 49 people wanted name and affiliation included • 45 people did not want name and affiliation included • LOTS of comments…several pages Jim Lansford, CSR Technology

More Related