1 / 14

Sounding and P Matrix Proposal

Sounding and P Matrix Proposal. Date: 2010-05-16. Authors:. Slide 1. Introduction. Sounding Format 6x6 and 8x8 P matrices P matrices for Nsts<=4 Straw polls. Sounding Mechanism (1). In 11n, there are multiple sounding formats: Staggered sounding NDP sounding

taber
Download Presentation

Sounding and P Matrix Proposal

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. Sounding and P Matrix Proposal Date: 2010-05-16 Authors: Slide 1 Vinko Erceg et al.

  2. Introduction • Sounding Format • 6x6 and 8x8 P matrices • P matrices for Nsts<=4 • Straw polls Vinko Erceg et al.

  3. Sounding Mechanism (1) • In 11n, there are multiple sounding formats: • Staggered sounding • NDP sounding • It would be desirable in TGac to converge onto a single sounding format • Compatibility and interoperability complications with multiple formats • Our proposal is to converge onto a single sounding mechanism: • NDP sounding frame format Slide 3 Vinko Erceg et al.

  4. Sounding Mechanism (2) • NDP sounding advantages • Defines a cleaner and simpler immediate feedback protocol • ACK is not required • Less latency in providing CSI feedback when to compared to staggered sounding • No Data present • May be important for MU feedback • Channel staleness problem • Only channel estimation for CSI feedback is performed after receiving an NDP packet • Potential parallel processing for data demodulation is avoided • Works well with MU sounding mechanism • Sounding for multiple users Slide 4 Vinko Erceg et al.

  5. P Matrix Definition (1) • In TGac, new P matrices for Nsts > 4 need to be defined • Proposal to define 6x6 DFT matrix P as follows Slide 5 Vinko Erceg et al.

  6. P Matrix Definition (2) • Proposal to define 8x8 matrix P as follows: where P4x4 is the 11n 4x4 P matrix Slide 6 Vinko Erceg et al.

  7. P Matrix Definition (3) • We propose the same P matrix as in 11n, when Nsts<=4 in 11ac packets • We propose not to include 5x5 and 7x7 P matrices in the draft Tgac standard due to implementation complexity reasons Slide 7 Vinko Erceg et al.

  8. Straw Polls Vinko Erceg et al.

  9. Straw Poll #1 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.1.J: All VHT transmissions shall have a preamble which contains a single section of long training fields,  with each long training field multiplied by entries belonging to a single P matrix, to enable channel estimation at the receiver. • Yes: 33 • No: 15 • Abs: 28 Vinko Erceg et al.

  10. Straw Poll #2 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.2.C: The draft specification shall include null data packet (NDP) as the only preamble format for sounding PPDUs. • Yes: 31 • No: 14 • Abs: 39 Vinko Erceg et al.

  11. Straw Poll #3 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.1.K: The long training fields consists of one, two, four, six or eight VHT long training fields (VHT-LTFs) that are necessary for demodulation of the VHT-Data portion of the PPDU or for channel estimation during an NDP packet. • Yes: 41 • No: 0 • Abs: 37 Vinko Erceg et al.

  12. Straw Poll #4 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.1.K: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for one, two or four VHT-LTFs shall be the same as defined in 802.11n standard specification (Section 20.3.9.4.6, Eq. (20-27)). • Yes: 67 • No: 0 • Abs: 9 Vinko Erceg et al.

  13. Straw Poll #5 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for six VHT-LTFs shall be as defined in slide 4 of 11-10/0566r2. • Yes: 42 • No: 6 • Abs: 29 Vinko Erceg et al.

  14. Straw Poll #6 • Do you support adding the following item into the specification framework document, 11-09/0992? • R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for eight VHT-LTFs shall be as defined in slide 5 of 11-10/0566r2. • Yes: 65 • No: 0 • Abs: 14 Vinko Erceg et al.

More Related