1. Towards an Improved Proposal Development Process for VHT
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Towards an Improved Proposal Development Process for VHT
Date:
Authors:
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

2. Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Towards an Improved Proposal Development Process for VHT May 12, Submission for the May 2008 IEEE VHT Study Group Meeting in Jacksonville
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc. 2
John Doe, Some Company

3. Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
IEEE Abstract
This submission is a contribution for the VHT Study group.
This contribution contains an outline for a possible approach to be used in the VHT taskgroup(s) for development of the technical specification.
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

4. Context and Introduction
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Context and Introduction
The Selection Procedure used for n and other is based on a process of continuous down selects of competing proposals
The use of this down-select procedure has contributed to considerable delays in the standardization process
This brief presentation introduces a possible alternative approach to be used by the VHT Taskgroup(s)
This presentation is a first draft, and collaboration on further development of the concept with other participants is highly appreciated
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

5. Outline of an Alternative Process
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
Outline of an Alternative Process
May, 2008
Taskgroup develops consensus around a framework for spec elements
Aim is to achieve consensus, potentially using simple majority voting when needed
See next slides for examples from .11n
Taskgroup votes to approve a document that describes all spec elements, with the intent that this solidifies the scope of the new specification
Participants create proposals for one or more spec elements
Could in theory cover all Spec Elements (i.e. ‘Complete Proposal’) but not necessarily
Once the Taskgroup has a coherent enough solution for all spec elements, a vote takes place to send the draft spec out for Letterballot
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

6. Example of Framework for Spec Elements (.11n PHY)
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Example of Framework for Spec Elements (.11n PHY)
Illustrative
Encoder
Puncturer
Parser
Interleaver
QAM
Mapper
Antenna
Mapper
iFFT
Window
& GI RF
Pilot
Preamble
Agreed upon
Under discussion
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

7. Example of Framework for Spec Elements (.11n MAC)
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Example of Framework for Spec Elements (.11n MAC)
Illustrative
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

8. Key Benefits of Proposed Approach
Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Key Benefits of Proposed Approach
Emphasis on consensus building
Technology selection based on technical merits
Fair and balanced consideration of which elements to include in the spec
Equal access for all participants to contribute technically sound elements to the specification
Decision process favors a single solution for a problem over multiple alternative solutions
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

9. Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Proposed Next Steps
Follow up sessions with individuals who are interested in further developing the concept
Ensure that alternative selection procedures are not excluded from the PAR and 5C documents
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company

10. Month Year
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
May, 2008
Strawpoll, May 2008
Strawpoll: do you support further development of the proposal process outlined in 08/579?
Yes: 33
No: 4
Abs: 25
Rolf de Vegt, Qualcomm, Inc.
John Doe, Some Company