Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0895r2 Submission July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 1 TGah PHY Ad Hoc Agenda and Report Date: 2012-07-17 Authors:

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0895r2 Submission July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 1 TGah PHY Ad Hoc Agenda and Report Date: 2012-07-17 Authors:"— Presentation transcript:

1 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 1 TGah PHY Ad Hoc Agenda and Report Date: Authors:

2 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 2 Agenda for July 17, 2012 – PM2, San Diego, CA Designation of a secretary for the minutes Reminder on Affiliation, IEEE Patent review and IP claims policies Reminder to record attendance Review of operating rules for PHY ad hoc Submissions July 2012

3 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Review of ad hoc operating rules The following summary is derived from 11-12/239r2 Pre-Motion: A pre-motion (doesn’t require voting rights) result of >=75% is required within an Ad Hoc to approve the resolution of all or part of an issue and forward that resolved item to the Taskgroup where it becomes a motion that requires >=75% approval to modify the specification framework or the draft specification. –Note: the term Pre-Motion was introduced by 11ac ad hoc operating rules to create a distinction between straw polls which intent is to result in a Motion at the Taskgroup, and strawpolls which intent is to only gauge the opinion of the members on a particular topic and are not intended to results in a motion at the Taskgroup. Stalemate: In the case a consensus can not be reached within an Ad Hoc group (a stalemate that prohibits further progress), the subject is moved to the Taskgroup if an Ad Hoc straw poll vote to move the subject to the Taskgroup achieves >50% approval. July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 3

4 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Review of ad hoc operating rules Transfer to another ad hoc: A motion passing with >50% in the Taskgroup shall be sufficient to move an issue previously assigned to an Ad Hoc group to any Ad Hoc group. A straw poll vote of >50% is required in an Ad Hoc group to refuse an issue from the Taskgroup. Transfer to another ad hoc: An issue may be sent from one Ad Hoc to another if both the sending Ad Hoc and the receiving Ad Hoc approve straw polls for taking the respective actions with >50% approval. A notice should be sent to the reflector indicating the approval of a straw poll to move an issue. To be accepted into the Draft specification, proposals from Ad Hoc group require a motion that passes with >=75% Taskgroup approval July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 4

5 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 5 Submissions and notes Most recent items are at the top of this section (i.e. have lower slide numbers). July 2012

6 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 6 Interpretive guide Text coloring: –Black = pending agenda item –Red = item partially addressed –Green = item completed –Gray = item not addressed in the session indicated at the top of the slide July 2012

7 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Submissions 12/815r0 Q Matrix Requirement for 1MHz/2MHz detection –Ron Porat (Broadcom) 12/818r0 padding –Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell) 12/819r0 preamble discussions –Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell) 12/825r2 Smoothing bit and beam_change indication bit –Jianhan Liu (Mediatek) 11-12/832r1 SIG Fields Design of Long Preamble –Yongho Seok (LG Electronics) 12/ 871r1 Spectrum access and Tx control for regulatory conformance –Shusaku Shimada(Yokogawa Co.) – TG meeting 12/872r0 Time Freq. Measurement Mechanism & Procedure –Shusaku Shimada(Yokogawa Co.) – TG meeting Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 7 July 2012

8 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Submissions Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 8 July 2012

9 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 9 PHY adhoc Pre-Motions to be brought for vote in TGah task group All PHY adhoc pre-motions are contained in this section, with the most recent motions appearing first. July 2012

10 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Pre-Motions x July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 10

11 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Straw Poll/Pre-Motion (818r0) Do you agree with the 11ah single user BCC padding flow as described in slides 6~7, and the LDPC encoding flow as described in slides 9~10, and insert the description text into the TGah Spec Framework in appropriate sections? Y: 23 N: 0 Abs: 4 Pre-motion passes Hongyuan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 11 July 2012

12 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Straw Poll / Pre-Motion (819r1) Do you agree with the text change as described in slide 5 and slide 7? Y: 23 N: 0 Abs: 3 Pre-motion passes Hongyuan Zhang, et. Al.Slide 12 July 2012

13 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission July 2012 Ron Porat, Broadcom Pre-Motion (815r0) Do you support the proposal in slides 5 and 6? Y: 22 N:0 A: 2 Pre-motion passes Slide 7

14 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Pre-motion 1 (825r2) Jan 2012 Slide 14 Short preambleLong preamble SU MU Length / Duration999 MCS44 - BW222 Aggregation11 - STBC111 Coding225 SGI111 GID -- 6 Nsts228 PAID99 - Ack Indication22 2 Smoothing1-- Beam-change Indication-1- Reserved444 CRC444 Tail666 Total48 Do you agree to have a smoothing bit in short preamble SIG field and a beam- change indication bit in long SU preamble SIGA field? Yes: 20No: 0Abstain: 2 Pre-motion passes Jianhan Liu, Mediatek Inc.. Beam-change indication bit: A value of 1 indicates that Q matrix is changed; A value of 0 indicates that Q matrix is un-changed

15 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionSlide 15 July 2012 Do you agree to add the following paragraph in the Specification Framework for Tgah in section R E? –Note: If the beam-change indication bit in long preamble is set to 0, the receiver may do channel smoothing. Otherwise, smoothing is not recommended. Yes: 20No: 0Abstain: 3 Pre-motion passes Straw poll 2 (825r2) Jianhan Liu, Mediatek Inc..

16 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission July 2012 Yongho Seok, LG ElectronicsSlide 16 Straw Poll 1 (832r2) Do you support the following SIGA fields design for >= 2MHz PHY? Y: 17 N: 0 Abs: 4 Pre-motion passes Short preambleLong preamble SU MU SU/MU Indication-11 Length / Duration999 MCS44 - BW222 Aggregation11 - STBC111 Coding225 SGI111 GID -- 6 Nsts228 PAID99 - Ack Indication22 2 Smoothing1-- Beam-change Indication-1- Reserved433 CRC444 Tail666 Total48

17 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Straw Poll 2 (832r2) Do you support the following modification of SIGB fields for >= 2MHz PHY? -R E bullet 2: replace “2MHz SIGB (long preamble)” with “For MU-MIMO transmission the 2MHz SIGB content is as shown in the following table. For SU-MIMO transmission the SIGB symbol is identical to D-LTF1.” -R.3.2.A bullet 4: replace the sentence starting with “n=0,1,2,…is the symbol index” with “n=0,1,2,…is the symbol index, continuously counted from the 1 st Data symbol for short preamble and long preamble when in SU mode, and from SIGB for long preamble when in MU mode” -R D: The draft specification shall use the 4 LSB of the 11n HTSIG field 8-bit CRC for the 4-bit CRC in 11ah 2MHz and 1MHz SIG(A) fields, and use the same 11n HTSIG field 8-bit CRC in SIGB field of the >=2MHz long preamble when in MU mode -Y: 17 -N: 0 -Abs: 3 pre-motion passes July 2012 Yongho Seok, LG ElectronicsSlide 17

18 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Straw-Polls July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 18

19 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 19 References [1] ah-proposed-selection-procedure.docx [2] ah-specification-framework-for-tgah.docx [3] ah-tgah-functional-requirements-and-evaluation- methodology.docx [4] 12/0602 TGah-Spec-Development-Process (TBD) [5] wng-900mhz-par-and-5c.docx [6] ah-TGah-Sub-Groups.pptx July 2012

20 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Appendix - Policies July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 20

21 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee: –Show slides #1 through #4 of this presentation –Advise the WG attendees that: The IEEE’s patent policy is consistent with the ANSI patent policy and is described in Clause 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws; Early identification of patent claims which may be essential for the use of standards under development is strongly encouraged; There may be Essential Patent Claims of which the IEEE is not aware. Additionally, neither the IEEE, the WG, nor the WG chair can ensure the accuracy or completeness of any assurance or whether any such assurance is, in fact, of a Patent Claim that is essential for the use of the standard under development. –Instruct the WG Secretary to record in the minutes of the relevant WG meeting: That the foregoing information was provided and that slides 1 through 4 (and this slide 0, if applicable) were shown; That the chair or designee provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) of which the participant is personally aware and that may be essential for the use of that standard Any responses that were given, specifically the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that were identified (if any) and by whom. –The WG Chair shall ensure that a request is made to any identified holders of potential essential patent claim(s) to complete and submit a Letter of Assurance. –It is recommended that the WG chair review the guidance in IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual and in FAQs 12 and 12a on inclusion of potential Essential Patent Claims by incorporation or by reference. Note: WG includes Working Groups, Task Groups, and other standards-developing committees with a PAR approved by the IEEE-SA Standards Board. Instructions for the WG Chair July 2012 Slide 21Porat, Cheong, Yang

22 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants: l “Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents l “Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims l “Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents) l The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2 l Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged l No duty to perform a patent search July 2012 Slide 22Porat, Cheong, Yang

23 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Patent Related Links All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development. Patent Policy is stated in these sources: IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual Material about the patent policy is available at If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit This slide set is available at July 2012 Slide 23Porat, Cheong, Yang

24 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Call for Potentially Essential Patents If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance: –Either speak up now or –Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or –Cause an LOA to be submitted July 2012 Slide 24Porat, Cheong, Yang

25 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 Submission Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings l All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. l Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. l Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. l Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. l Technical considerations remain primary focus l Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets. l Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation. l Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details. July 2012 Slide 25Porat, Cheong, Yang

26 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 26 Member Affiliation It is defined in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws, as: “An individual is deemed “affiliated” with any individual or entity that has been, or will be, financially or materially supporting that individual’s participation in a particular IEEE standards activity. This includes, but is not limited to, his or her employer and any individual or entity that has or will have, either directly or indirectly, requested, paid for, or otherwise sponsored his or her participation. July 2012

27 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 27 Declaration of Affiliation Revision: May 2007 Standards Board Bylaw – Openness Openness is defined as the quality of being not restricted to a particular type or category of participants. All meetings involving standards development an all IEEE Sponsor ballots shall be open toa all interested parties. Each individual participant in IEEE Standards activities shall disclose his or her affiliations when requested. A person who knows or reasonably should know, that a participant’s disclosure is materially incomplete or incorrect should report that fact to the Secretary of the IEEE-SA Standards Board and the appropriate Sponsors. –http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.htmlhttp://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html July 2012

28 doc.: IEEE /0895r2 SubmissionPorat, Cheong, YangSlide 28 Affiliation Policy Requirement to declare affiliation at all standards development meetings and recorded in the minutes –Affiliation not necessarily same as employer –Declaration requirement may be familiar to some 802 WGs, though WG declaration process may evolve 11. What if I refuse to disclose my affiliation? –As outlined in IEEE-SA governance documents, you will lose certain rights. In a working group where voting rights are gained through attendance, no attendance credit will be granted if affiliation isn’t declared. Similarly, voting rights are to be removed if affiliation isn’t declared. Affiliation declaration will be added to Sponsor ballot July 2012


Download ppt "Doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0895r2 Submission July 2012 Porat, Cheong, YangSlide 1 TGah PHY Ad Hoc Agenda and Report Date: 2012-07-17 Authors:"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google