TGn Opening Report - July 2004

TGn Opening Report Portland, Oregon, US July 200404/658 Bruce Kraemer, Chair bkraemer@conexant.com Garth Hillman, Secretary garth.hillman@amd.com July 12, 2004 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Plans for July Meeting time allocation reduced to 16 hours for July There are no major technical voting issues pending. Many people want to work on proposals • Opening remarks • Agenda • May minutes 04-496 • Other information items • Status of Call for Proposals • Technical Presentations • Overall TGn timeline • .19 liaison planning (joint meeting) • Regulatory issues discussion with .18 • .21 liaison planning (joint meeting) • TGn organization/officer planning • Planning for September Berlin • Correction to CC Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – May 2004 • 6. Patents • IEEE standards may include the known use of essential patents and 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. This assurance shall be provided without coercion and prior to approval of the standard (or reaffirmation when a patent becomes known after initial approval of the standard). This assurance shall be a letter that is in the form of either: • a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the patentee will not enforce any of its present or future patent(s) whose use would be required to implement the proposed IEEE standard against any person or entity using the patent(s) to comply with the standard or • b) A statement that a license will be made available without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination • This assurance shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal and is irrevocable during that period. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – March 2003 • Don’t discuss licensing terms or conditions • Don’t discuss product pricing, territorial restrictions or market share • Don’t discuss ongoing litigation or threatened litigation • Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed… do formally object. If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. Attendance & Voting Status Use 802wirelessworld to register attendance If you encounter Attendance Issues during the session send an email to Harry Worstell – • hworstell@att.com • Questions on Voting status – see Al Petrick • apetrick@icefyre.com Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. May Plans & Accomplishments • Complete and adopt CCs • Complete and adopt Usage Models • Establish firm dates for • Posting letter of intent • Posting technical proposals to server • Start presentations • Complete Call for Proposals letter • Review project time line • Prepare for election of Tech Ed & V. Chair • Receive technical presentations Disbanded FRCC subcommittee Released Call for Proposals Monday May 17 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. May to July Activities There were no conference calls. Call for proposals closed on June 18 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. TGn Document Summary –July 12 Primary Documents • Functional Requirements 03-0813 r12 • Comparison Criteria 03-0814 r30 • Usage Models 03-0802 r23 • Channel Models 03-0940 r04 • Call for Proposals Letter 03-0858 r06 Other helpful documents: • Selection Procedure 03-0665 r09 • FRCC Cumulative minutes 03-0815 r14 • FRCC Comments resolution spreadsheet 04-0343 r11 • TGn Schedule 04-0381 r02 • Selection Procedure Minutes 03-0740 r02 • May Minutes 04-0496 r00 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. TGn - July Schedule All sessions will be held in Hilton Grand Ballroom I Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

3. July Planned Technical Presentations Monday • LDPC vs CC over 11n channels Huaning Niu 04-0682-r0 Samsung • Performance comparison of antenna selection and DSTBC Henry Horng 04-0681-r0 Samsung • Physical Layer Approach for 802.11n Mustafa Eroz 04-0746-r0 Hughes NS • MAC Overview John Ketchum 04-0717-r0 Qualcomm • MAC Performance ResultsJohn Ketchum 04-0716-r0 Qualcomm Tuesday • PHY Design for Spatial Multiplexing MIMO John Ketchum 04-0721-r0 Qualcomm • Link Level Sim results for Spatial Multiplexing MIMO John Ketchum 04-0720-r0 Qualcomm • Synchronization Reqts for 802.11n John Kowalski 04-0775-r0 Sharp • 40/20/10 MHz Channelization John Sadowsky 04-0786-r0 Intel Wednesday 4pm • 40MHz/20MHz Interoperability Jeff Gilbert 04-0772-r0 Atheros • Antenna selection for MIMO systems Andy Molisch 04-0713-r1 Mitsubishi • TX processing: a viable scheme for MIMO OFDM Bart van Poucke 04-0792-r0 IMEC • Preambles for MIMO channel estimation Bart van Poucke 04-0794-r0 IMEC • Co-channel Interference in 802.11n Networks Aon Mujtaba 04-0819-r0 Agere Withdrawn • LDPC coding for MIMO systems Jianxuan Du 04-0714-r0 Mitsubishi • IEEE 802.11n MAC Design Considerations Daqing Gu, J Tao 04-0727-r0 Mitsubishi Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Agenda Detail 1. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. Approval of Agenda • Motion to approve agenda • Move: • Second: Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. May Minutes from 04-496r0 Abstract • Cumulative minutes of the High Throughput Task Group meetings held during the IEEE 802.11/15 Interim meeting in Anaheim from May 10 through 14, 2004. • Executive Summary (see closing report doc. 11-04-0532r1): • Completed all selection criteria steps required to issue a Call for Proposal (CFP) were completed as follows: • Functional Requirement doc 11-03-813r12 was adopted in March • Channel Model doc 11-03-940r4 was adopted • Comparison Criteria doc 11-03-814r30 was adopted • Usage Model doc. 11-03-802r23 was adopted • FRCC special committee was disbanded • Key dates (GMT-5) in CFP timeline were agreed to as follows: • Issue CFP – May 17 • Deadline for Letters of Intent – June 18 • Proposal documents submitted – August 13 • First Proposal presented – September 13 • CFP document, 11-03-858r7, was agreed to by the TG and presented to the WG on Friday 5-14-04 • Received 9 technical proposals (not related to FRCC) • Plan for July meeting was generated and agreed to by the TG Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. Approval of May Minutes • Motion to approve minutes as contained in 04-496 r0 • Move: Garth Hillman • Second: Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. Press & Articles • Glad to arrange them, but • None independent - only with WG chair • Coordinated via Publicity chair Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. The following report is based on TGn closing report 04-0532 which is contained in the slides above. TGn Committee Report – Posted to Web • TGn (High Throughput) achieved a significant milestone by completing the generation of its 4 selection criteria documents for Usage Models, Functional Requirements, Comparison Criteria and Channel Models. In compliance with TGn’s Selection Procedure, completion of these 4 documents allows the Task Group to release a Call for Proposals. The Call for Proposals will be issued on Monday May 17. • Specified within the CFP are three key dates • The posting of Letters of Intent (Friday, June 18) • Posting of Proposals and related documentation (Friday, August 13) • Presentation of Proposals (Monday, September 13) • 9 Technical presentations covering various suggestions for High Throughput MAC an PHY improvements were heard as well. • Activities planned for July include • Status of Call for Proposals • Technical Presentations • Overall TGn timeline • .19 liaison planning (joint meeting) • .21 liaison planning (joint meeting) • regulatory issues discussion with .18 • TGn organization/officer planning Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. IEEE P802.11 - TGn Backgrounder TGn will define the next generation standard for high speed wireless LANs. The group's basic goal is to develop a standard capable of providing at least 100Mbps throughput at the MAC service access point. This is expected to provide roughly three times the throughput of current standards 802.11g and 802.11a. TGn has defined comprehensive Functional Requirements, Comparison Criteria, Usage Scenarios, and Simulation Environments which must be addressed by the proposals in order to be considered for the final standard. Complete proposals must address all of the requirements. Partial proposals, will most likely address various aspects of the MAC or Physical layer, but do not need to fulfill all the requirements indicated in the complete complement of reporting documents listed above. A call for proposals was issued on May 17 and closed on June 18. Following the close date of a formal call for proposals, the chair of Task Group n (TGn), Bruce Kraemer, has compiled and issued the list of individuals who have indicated that they will present a proposal. The list of respondents includes 21indicating they will make complete proposals and 41 who wish to make partial proposals. Proposals must be posted for membership review no later than August 13. At the upcoming IEEE 802.11 meeting in July TGn will plan for proposal presentations which will begin at the meeting in September. Past experience with previous calls for proposals would indicate that due to consolidation and mergers the total number of presentations will be less than 61. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

2. Letters of Intent 62 Letters of Intent 21 Complete 41 Partial Countries Represented Canada Finland France Germany Ireland Japan Korea Netherlands Singapore Sweden Taiwan US • Update from initial announcement which stated • 61 total: 22 complete, 39 partial • One email was initially lost. • One proposal was listed as complete – should have been partial Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

2. Call – Notification Process • Announcement of results via letter to reflector (1812 members) • Created mailing list of primary presenters • and mailing list of secondary • Next critical date : posting August 13 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

2. Letters of Intent - Complete Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

2. Letters of Intent - Partial Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

3. July Planned Technical Presentations Monday • LDPC vs CC over 11n channels Huaning Niu 04-0682-r0 Samsung • Performance comparison of antenna selection and DSTBC Henry Horng 04-0681-r0 Samsung • Physical Layer Approach for 802.11n Mustafa Eroz 04-0746-r0 Hughes NS • MAC Overview John Ketchum 04-0717-r0 Qualcomm • MAC Performance ResultsJohn Ketchum 04-0716-r0 Qualcomm Tuesday • PHY Design for Spatial Multiplexing MIMO John Ketchum 04-0721-r0 Qualcomm • Link Level Sim results for Spatial Multiplexing MIMO John Ketchum 04-0720-r0 Qualcomm • Synchronization Reqts for 802.11n John Kowalski 04-0775-r0 Sharp • 40/20/10 MHz Channelization John Sadowsky 04-0786-r0 Intel Wednesday 4pm • Antenna selection for MIMO systems Andy Molisch 04-0713-r0 Mitsubishi • LDPC coding for MIMO systems Jianxuan Du 04-0714-r0 Mitsubishi • TX processing: a viable scheme for MIMO OFDM Bart van Poucke 04-0792-r0 IMEC • Preambles for MIMO channel estimation Bart van Poucke 04-0794-r0 IMEC • 40MHz/20MHz Interoperability Jeff Gilbert 04-0xxx-r0 Atheros Withdrawn • IEEE 802.11n MAC Design Considerations Daqing Gu, J Tao 04-0727-r0 Mitsubishi Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

4. Time line You are here IEEE 802 Sessions Open Monday Sep 13 Monday May 17, 2004 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday Aug 13 No later than midnight GMT -5 Friday June 18 80 days 50 days 30 days 30 days • Event #3 • Documents posted on IEEE server • Technical Proposal • CC Compliance Report • FR Compliance Report Event #1 Issue call for proposals Event #2 Intent to present Full or Partial proposal notification submitted Event #4 “All?” Proposals Presented in TGn Session Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

4. Time line - History Project Time line reviewed July 2003 (03-488r0) Schedule Highlights Issue First Letter Ballot on Draft 1.0 July 2004 Issue First Sponsor Ballot Jan 2005 Complete Sponsor ballot – accepted by ExCom July 2005 Publish Oct 2005 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

802.11 Example Project History Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

4. Time line - Proposed • Schedule Highlights • Issue First Letter Ballot on Draft 1.0 July 2005 • 3 sessions to review edit (Sep, Nov, Jan, Mar) • Issue First Sponsor Ballot Mar 2006 • 3 sessions to review & edit ( May, July, Sept) • Complete Sponsor ballot – accepted by ExCom Nov 2006 • Publish Mar 2007 Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

5. .19 Joint meeting Logistics and Topics • Wednesday 1:30 – 2:30 pm in Hilton Grand Ballroom I. • The proposed 802 P&P changes to address coexistence • How those rules could be interpreted for 802.11n • What is a Coexistence Assurance Document? • 19-04-0017r0 LMSC presentation • 19-04-0010r4 Proposed Rules Change Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TAG 19 –part 1 19-04-0010r4 • Overview • The introduction of a new or amended wireless standard creates the possibility of interference between the new standard and present standards. The purpose of these proposed changes to the LMSC policies and procedures is to establish a process in IEEE 802 to assure that the proposed standard and existing standards will coexist. • A Coexistence Assurance (CA) document is used as a tool for the WG and LMSC executive committee to assess coexistence with other users of the medium. • Coexistence is in the domain of MAC/PHY interactions between dissimilar systems. The criteria for a system resiliency to interference is ultimately dependent on the expected application of the proposed standard or amendment. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TAG 19 –part 2 19-04-0010r4 • The role of TAG 802.19 in this process is to act in the following ways: • Establish and maintain a set of methodologies giving guidance to the WGs on how to develop a CA document to characterize effects on users of the common medium, including the new standard or amendment. • Act as a resource to WG to help them decide which methodology is appropriate for their standard or amendment. • Assist the WGs in evaluating the results of their CA analysis when requested. • Evaluate the validity of the CA analysis WGs have completed in preparation for forwarding standards and amendments to sponsor ballot. This evaluation does not address if the proposed standard will adequately coexist. It does evaluate if the methodology was appropriate, executed, and reported correctly. LMSC makes the final determination on the level of coexistence necessary for the standard or amendment. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TAG 19 –part 3 19-04-0010r4 • The process establishes what a wireless working group shall do at two steps in the standards development process: • At the PAR approval (or PAR corrigendum) phase a wireless working group (WG) shall indicate that it intends to submit a CA document or explain why it is not needed. • If the WG committed to create a CA document, the WG must submit it to the 802.19 TAG prior to requesting that the SEC forward the draft to sponsor ballot. The TAG will offer its technical comments to the wireless WG and the LMSC. • When a wireless working group has a draft standard and has developed a coexistence assurance document, the wireless working group may submit the coexistence assurance document to the 802.19 TAG for preliminary review. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TAG 19 – part 4 19-04-0010r4 • Proposed addition to PAR process (procedure 2): • 6.6 Coexistence • For a wireless project to be authorized, the WG is required to produce a Coexistence Assurance (CA) document to be submitted with their draft unless there is a compelling reason to omit this step. • Working Group will submit a CA document with the draft • Working Group will not submit a CA document • If no CA document, state reason: _________________________ Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TAG 19 – part 5 • Proposed addition to LMSC standard procedures: • Procedure 11 • PROCEDURE FOR APPROVAL TO FORWARD A DRAFT WIRELESS STANDARD • In the process of preparing for Sponsor Ballot, the WG shall provide the coexistence assurance (CA) document to the 802.19 TAG no less than 60 days prior to requesting that the LMSC SEC send the draft to sponsor ballot. The LMSC recommends that the WG provide the CA document to 802.19 prior to WG letter ballot. • The TAG shall give its technical comments on the CA document within 45 days after receipt. • The 802.19 TAG will evaluate if the CA methodology was applied appropriately and reported correctly. The LMSC shall make the final determination on whether the coexistence necessary for the standard or amendment, as defined by the WG, has been met. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

6. .18 Joint meetingLogistics and Topics • Wednesday 2:30 to 3:30 pm in Hilton Grand Ballroom I • TGn question: Regulatory views on acceptability of MIMO and extended channels and xxx • Two prong approach: • What do current regulations allow? • How to promote changes if needed? • Proposal to invite experts via .18 • Julius Knapp to November meeting (San Antonio) (approved by ExCom) • Andy Gowan of UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) • Other suggestions • Need to prepare topics for discussion – send to guests ahead of time • Recommend sub-committee to prepare topics for review Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

7. .21 Joint meeting • Thursday 8 am to 9 am in Hilton Grand Ballroom I. • Questions from 802.21 perspective, I would be interested in understanding the following: 1. Time frame for the development/publishing of the standard, which would help us determine by when certain inputs have to be ready in either direction. 2. An understanding of: Is it an amendment to the existing MAC/PHY defined by .11a/b/g or is it a completely new MAC/PHY. In case of former, what can/cannot be changed. 3. What input would TGn like from 802.21 such that TGn is 802.21 enabled for handover across heterogeneous networks. • Joint meeting plan: 10 minute presentations • TGn overview • .21 overview • Q & A between members • Plans going forward for September, November, … Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

.21 Overview • PAR and 5 Criteria are on the IEEE website • IEEE 802.21 is developing standards to enable handover and interoperability between heterogeneous network types including both 802 and non 802 networks. • PAR: The purpose is to improve the user experience of mobile devices by facilitating handover between 802 networks whether or not they are of different media types, including both wired and wireless, where handover is not otherwise defined and to make it possible for mobile devices to perform seamless handover where the network environment supports it. These mechanisms may also be useable for handovers between 802 networks and non 802 networks. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

.21 - More Par Detail • We define handover as the maintenance of sessions and/or service flows while connectivity is moved from one point of attachment to another. • The scope and purpose are derived from the need to address the following three problems that were identified during the study group phase: • – #1 Detection of a useable attachment to a network is impacted by the ambiguous indicators of network attachment in certain 802 MACs. Thus there is a need to develop a standard that allows a mobile terminal to optimize detection of a useable attachment to a network above the LLC. • – #2 The information necessary to make effective handover decisions is lacking in part because the 802 networks provide insufficient information to the upper layers. Thus there is a need to develop a standard that permits information exchange between mobile terminals and/or networks to enable mobile terminals and/or networks to make more effective handover decisions. • – #3 There is no standardized mechanism in 802 for information exchange between mobile terminals and network attachment points. This impacts the ability to make informed decisions to select between disparate network attachment points or to initiate handover between heterogeneous network types or between administrative domains within a single network type. Thus there is a need to develop a standard that permits mobile terminals and network attachment points to access information on which to base effective handover decisions. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

8. Officers • Call for nominations opened for • Technical editor • election planned Thursday morning July 15 • Vice chair • election planned Monday November session • Procedure: • 5 minute speech by each candidate • Single elimination voting rounds to obtain final candidate Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Strawpoll When do you want to hold officer elections? • July 19 • Later 39 • Conclusion: • No elections during July • No elections during September • Reconsider in November • Use WG Chair and VC to assist in Berlin Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

10. Correction to CC67 Editorial error discovered Adrian Stephens will provide additional detail Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Plans going forward Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Why do we have any of these rules? • Expedite development of a quality technical standard • Provide equitable framework and environment for preparation, presentation and discussion • Complete and easily comparable technical presentations • Selection based upon technical merit • Elimination is not intended to be based upon rule infractions • Procedures to encourage partial proposals and mergers Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Procedure Questions (04-817) Up to and During September • What can change in material on the server after 13 Aug? • Can you present material new on the server after 13 Aug? • What precisely has to be on the server at 13 Aug (doc and/or presentation and/or results?) • How many hours before the start of the session can anything be modified? • If the number of proposals drops significantly, would you entertain modifying the rules to allow >1 hour presentation time? • Are partial and full presentations to be given the same time? • Can you yield your time? • Can you yield your time to someone else? • Any limitations on time on individual presenters that have multiple registered proposals? After or during September • Review logistics of voting rounds? • Are there any limitations to the changes that can occur between rounds of voting? Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

1. TGn - September Schedule All sessions will be held in xx Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

9. Berlin – Logistics r1 – one page version September Philosophy • All proposal presentations will be treated equitably and equally • All proposal presentations will be heard in September • Maximum available TG meeting time will be available (34 hours). Available speaking time will be slightly less to allow for administrative topics at the beginning and close of the TGn session. Presenter speaking time • Presentations will each be allocated an equal amount of time by the formulas: Total available speaking time = Total TGn session time – time for administrative matters, opening and closing remarks Speaking + discussion time = Total available speaking time / number of presentations And: An initial time allocation calculation will be made and communicated to the presenters immediately after close of proposal postings (Aug 13). If speakers withdraw, their time will be returned to the time pool and added to each of the remaining speakers in equal increments of time. Any presenter requiring less than the allocated time should notify the chair, any un-needed time to the speaking time pool and distributed among all other speakers. • Adjustments to time allocation on Monday morning Sept 13 may be necessary based upon last minute mergers or withdrawals. Time increments will not be adjusted after presentations begin on the morning of Sept 13. Speaking Sequence • Partial and Complete presentations will be treated as a single group. Within each of the two groups, speaking order will be established on Monday Sept 6 by means of drawing numbers from a hat. This procedure is to be carried out by the WG chair. Information procedure • Speaking sequence and preliminary speaking time assignments numbers info will be sent to all presenters via email so that the speaking time slots are known sufficiently before meetings begin on Sept 13. This, and other relevant information, will be contained in a submission to the 802wirelessworld document server (TGn Berlin Proposal Presentation Information 11-04-0796). Updates will be distributed as necessary. Revisions • What about changes to proposals after Aug 13 posting deadline? • It is recognized that some corrections may be appropriate. Minor revisions to presentations used during September session must be frozen on the 802wirelessworld server by 6am local Berlin time on the morning of Sept 13. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Berlin – Logistics r1 -part 1 September Philosophy • All proposal presentations will be treated equitably and equally • All proposal presentations will be heard in September • Maximum available TG meeting time will be available (34 hours). Available speaking time will be slightly less to allow for administrative topics at the beginning and close of the TGn session. Presenter speaking time • Presentations will each be allocated an equal amount of time by the formulas: Total available speaking time = Total TGn session time – time for administrative matters, opening and closing remarks Speaking + discussion time = Total available speaking time / number of presentations And: An initial time allocation calculation will be made and communicated to the presenters immediately after close of proposal postings (Aug 13). If speakers withdraw, their time will be returned to the time pool and added to each of the remaining speakers in equal increments of time. Any presenter requiring less than the allocated time should notify the chair, any un-needed time to the speaking time pool and distributed among all other speakers. • Adjustments to time allocation on Monday morning Sept 13 may be necessary based upon last minute mergers or withdrawals. Time increments will not be adjusted after presentations begin on the morning of Sept 13. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

Berlin – Logistics r1 – part 2 Speaking Sequence • Partial and Complete presentations will be treated as a single group. Within each of the two groups, speaking order will be established on Monday Sept 6 by means of drawing numbers from a hat. This procedure is to be carried out by the WG chair. Information procedure • Speaking sequence and preliminary speaking time assignments numbers info will be sent to all presenters via email so that the speaking time slots are known sufficiently before meetings begin on Sept 13. This, and other relevant information, will be contained in a submission to the 802wirelessworld document server (TGn Berlin Proposal Presentation Information 11-04-0796). Updates will be distributed as necessary. Revisions • What about changes to proposals after Aug 13 posting deadline? • It is recognized that some corrections may be appropriate. Minor revisions to presentations used during September session must be frozen on the 802wirelessworld server by 6am local Berlin time on the morning of Sept 13. Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

TGn Opening Report - July 2004