1 / 8

Proposed Resolution of D01 Comment S10-649 on UWB Channel Allocation

This document proposes changing to Channel 3 as mandatory for UWB low band, discussing filtering requirements and advantages for implementation.

benjamin-buck
Download Presentation

Proposed Resolution of D01 Comment S10-649 on UWB Channel Allocation

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. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Proposed Resolution of D01 Comment S10-649, Mandatory channel at UWB low band] Date Submitted: [XX, September, 2010] Source: [Huan-Bang Li, Ryuji Kohno] Company [NICT] Address [3-4 Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa, Japan] Voice:[+81 468475104], FAX: [:[+81 468475431], E-Mail:[{lee, kohno}@nict.go.jp] Re: [Proposed Resolution of D01 Comment S10-649] Abstract: [propose a resolution to D01 Comment S10-649] Purpose: [This document is for the UWB comment resolution discussion for TG6 draft D01.] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  2. Proposed Resolution of D0 Comment S10-649 Mandatory channel at UWB low band Huan-Bang Li and Ryuji Kohno NICT H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  3. D0 Comment S10-649 • Original comment: Is it proper to use channel 2 as mandatory in low band? H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  4. Proposed Resolution(s) • change to channel 3. The reason behind using channel 2 as mandatory is that waive of DAA at 4.2-4.8 GHz (channel 3) was set at the end of 2010. It was considered to have no advantage to use channel 3 without waive of DAA. However, Japanis in pre-decision to waive DAA until the end of 2013. Using channel 3 as mandatory can fully take the advantage and greatly reduce cost for implementation. H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  5. Discussion point (1) • Channel 3 may ask for additional filtering at low band to fit for spectral mask. H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  6. Discussion point (2) • LDC: throughput is not high enough • Implementation: DAA vs. filter for mandatory • If channel 2 is mandatory, both channel 1 and channel 3 still need filters. H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  7. Discussion point (3) Because 15.4a use channel 3 as mandatory, for 15.6, • using channel 2 as mandatory is good for LDC devices in the sense of coexistence with 15.4a. • Using channel 2 as mandatory is good in the sense of coexistence with 15.4a, if slotted ALOHA is used. H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

  8. Conclusion • Channel 2 vs. channel 3. • Not against to use channel 2 as mandatory in the following sense: • International harmonization • Reduce the burden of mandatory implementation H.-B. Li, R. Kohno, NICT

More Related