doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide Marvell Lane, Santa Clara, CA, TGn Chairs’ Report Orlando, FL, US 802 Plenary – Mar ‘08 Date: Authors: 555 Mathilda Ave, Sunnyvale, CA (408)

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 2 Primary Meeting Documents Chair’s Report r0 Editors Report r0

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 3 Welcome to Orlando Mar Caribe Royale Hotel Meeting Room Sierra E Monday (starting at 16:00)

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 4 Meeting Protocol Please announce your affiliation when you first address the group during a meeting slot

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 5 Attendance Back of badge Register 2.Indicate attendance See document r0 for more details

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 6 Word Documents –Page 1

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 7 [place presentation subject title text here] Date: YYYY-MM-DD Authors: PowerPoint Documents –Page 1

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 8 Attendance, Voting & Document Status Make sure your badges are correct If you plan to make a submission be sure it does not contain company logos or advertising Questions on Voting status, Ballot pool, Access to Reflector, Documentation, member’s area –see Harry Worstell – Cell Phones Silent or Off

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 9 Current Policies Policies and Procedures: IEEE Patent Policy - Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of that standard? Minute 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. Affiliation FAQ - Anti-Trust FAQ - Ethics - IEEE Policies and Procedures - and-proceedures.htm and-proceedures.htm IEEE 802 Policies and Procedures - procedures.pdfhttp:// procedures.pdf

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 10 Instructions for the WG Chair The IEEE-SA strongly recommends that at each WG meeting the chair or a designee: –Show slides #1 through #5 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 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 the five slides 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) that the participant believes 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. It is recommended that the WG chair review the guidance in the Standards Companion on inclusion of potential Essential Patent Claims by normative reference.

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 11 Highlights of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards –Participants have a duty to tell the IEEE if they know (based on personal awareness) of potentially Essential Patent Claims they or their employer own –Participants are encouraged to tell the IEEE if they know of potentially Essential Patent Claims owned by others This encouragement is particularly strong as the third party may not be a participant in the standards process –Working Group required to request assurance –Early assurance is encouraged –Terms of assurance shall be either: Reasonable and nondiscriminatory, with or without monetary compensation; or, A statement of non-assertion of patent rights –Assurances Shall be provided on the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved LOA form May optionally include not-to-exceed rates, terms, and conditions Shall not be circumvented through sale or transfer of patents Shall be brought to the attention of any future assignees or transferees Shall apply to Affiliates unless explicitly excluded Are irrevocable once submitted and accepted Shall be supplemented if Submitter becomes aware of other potential Essential Patent Claims –A “Blanket Letter of Assurance” may be provided at the option of the patent holder –A patent holder has no duty to perform a patent search –Full policy available at 1

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide Policy IEEE standards may be drafted in terms that include the use of Essential Patent Claims. If the IEEE receives notice that a [Proposed] IEEE Standard may require the use of a potential Essential Patent Claim, the IEEE shall request licensing assurance, on the IEEE Standards Board approved Letter of Assurance form, from the patent holder or patent applicant. The IEEE shall request this assurance without coercion. The Submitter of the Letter of Assurance may, after Reasonable and Good Faith Inquiry, indicate it is not aware of any Patent Claims that the Submitter may own, control, or have the ability to license that might be or become Essential Patent Claims. If the patent holder or patent applicant provides an assurance, it should do so as soon as reasonably feasible in the standards development process. This assurance shall be provided prior to the Standards Board’s approval of the standard. This assurance shall be provided prior to a reaffirmation if the IEEE receives notice of a potential Essential Patent Claim after the standard’s approval or a prior reaffirmation. An asserted potential Essential Patent Claim for which an assurance cannot be obtained (e.g., a Letter of Assurance is not provided or the Letter of Assurance indicates that assurance is not being provided) shall be referred to the Patent Committee. A Letter of Assurance shall be either: a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the Submitter without conditions will not enforce any present or future Essential Patent Claims against any person or entity making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing, distributing, or implementing a compliant implementation of the standard; or b) A statement that a license for a compliant implementation of the standard will be made available to an unrestricted number of applicants on a worldwide basis without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination. At its sole option, the Submitter may provide with its assurance any of the following: (i) a not-to-exceed license fee or rate commitment, (ii) a sample license agreement, or (iii) one or more material licensing terms. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards 2

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 13 Copies of an Accepted LOA may be provided to the working group, but shall not be discussed, at any standards working group meeting. The Submitter and all Affiliates (other than those Affiliates excluded in a Letter of Assurance) shall not assign or otherwise transfer any rights in any Essential Patent Claims that are the subject of such Letter of Assurance that they hold, control, or have the ability to license with the intent of circumventing or negating any of the representations and commitments made in such Letter of Assurance. The Submitter of a Letter of Assurance shall agree (a) to provide notice of a Letter of Assurance either through a Statement of Encumbrance or by binding any assignee or transferee to the terms of such Letter of Assurance; and (b) to require its assignee or transferee to (i) agree to similarly provide such notice and (ii) to bind its assignees or transferees to agree to provide such notice as described in (a) and (b). This assurance shall apply to the Submitter and its Affiliates except those Affiliates the Submitter specifically excludes on the relevant Letter of Assurance. If, after providing a Letter of Assurance to the IEEE, the Submitter becomes aware of additional Patent Claim(s) not already covered by an existing Letter of Assurance that are owned, controlled, or licensable by the Submitter that may be or become Essential Patent Claim(s) for the same IEEE Standard but are not the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, then such Submitter shall submit a Letter of Assurance stating its position regarding enforcement or licensing of such Patent Claims. For the purposes of this commitment, the Submitter is deemed to be aware if any of the following individuals who are from, employed by, or otherwise represent the Submitter have personal knowledge of additional potential Essential Patent Claims, owned or controlled by the Submitter, related to a [Proposed] IEEE Standard and not already the subject of a previously submitted Letter of Assurance: (a) past or present participants in the development of the [Proposed] IEEE Standard, or (b) the individual executing the previously submitted Letter of Assurance. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards 3

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 14 The assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal. The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those Patent Claims, or for determining whether any licensing terms or conditions are reasonable or non-discriminatory. Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted as giving rise to a duty to conduct a patent search. No license is implied by the submission of a Letter of Assurance. In order for IEEE’s patent policy to function efficiently, individuals participating in the standards development process: (a) shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware and that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents; and (b) should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards 4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 15 Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. Don ’ t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. Don ’ t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. –Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. Technical considerations remain primary focus Don ’ t discuss fixing product prices, allocation of customers, or dividing sales markets. Don ’ t discuss the status or substance of ongoing 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 or visit 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. This slide set is available at 5

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 16 Question Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of that standard? Minute 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.

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 17 TGn Minutes

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 18 TGn Minutes of January ’08 08/0090 r0 Executive Summary: Executive Summary (also see Chairs’ meeting doc r6 and closing report doc r0): 1.Session was devoted to LB115 comment resolution 2.At the close of the meeting only 151 comments left to complete processing. 3.Next AdHoc scheduled for March in Orlando (week prior to IEEE 802 Plenary) 4.TGn Editor’s report r3 5.No Timeline changes were made.

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 19 Approve Minutes Motion to approve Jan ‘07 (Taipei) TGn minutes as contained in r0 Move: Second:

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 20 TGn Quick Review of Events prior to this meeting

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 21 One Page History of TGn HTSG formed – First meeting (Sep-11-’02 Monterey) TGn formed – First meeting (Sep-15-’03 Singapore) Began call for proposals (May 17 ’04 Garden Grove) 32 First round presentations (Sep 13 ’04 Berlin) Down selected to one proposal (Mar ’05 Atlanta) –first confirm vote failed Confirmation vote #2 failed - reset to 3 proposals -left the May ‘05 meeting with a serious deadlock. (Cairns) 3 proposal groups agreed to a joint proposal activity (Jul ’05 San Francisco) JP proposal accepted by vote of 184/0/4, editor instructed to create draft (Jan ’06 Waikoloa) Baseline specification converted into Draft 1.0 (335p). Letter ballot issued (LB84) March 20, ’06 (Denver) and closed on April 29, ‘06 (failed) Draft 1.0 Comment resolution begins (May ’06 Jacksonville) Approved 6711 editorial and 1041 technical resolutions; Created Draft 1.03 (Jul ’06 San Diego) Approved 568 technical resolutions (Sep ’06 Melbourne); Created Draft 1.06 (388p) Approved 703 technical resolutions (Nov ’06 Dallas); Created Draft 1.09 (444p) Approved 496 technical resolutions (Jan ’07 London); created D 1.10 (500p); went to WG letter ballot Feb 7, ’07 with D 2.0; closed March 9, ’07 LB97 on TGn D2.0 passed with 83.4% approval. (Mar ’07 Orlando) Began comment resolution on with target of Draft 3.0 completion and release to ballot in Sep ’07. Approved 1470 editorial resolutions and approved TGn draft Also approved 450 technical comment resolutions. (May 07 Montreal) Cumulative insertion of resolutions contained in TGn draft (494p) Approved 750 technical resolutions and approved TGn draft (July 07 San Francisco) Cumulative insertion of resolutions now contained in TGn draft (498p) Approved 507 technical resolutions and approved recirculation ballot for TGn draft 3.0 (544p). (Sep 07 Waikoloa) Recirculation passed. Approved 282 editorial resolutions and approved TGn draft Approved 97 technical resolutions. (Nov 07 Atlanta) Cumulative insertion of resolutions now contained in TGn draft (558p) Approved 313 technical comment resolutions (Jan 08 Taipei). Cumulative approved comments now in D3.03. Additional ad hoc comment resolutions contained in speculative edits D3.04, D3.05, D3.06.

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 22 Draft 4.0 – Activity Plan Focus on Technical Comments Event Nov Plenary (Atlanta) Telecons Jan ad hoc (Taipei) Jan interim (Taipei) Telecons Mar ad hoc (Orlando) Mar Plenary (Orlando) Activity Review submissions Prepare subs for voting Resolution approvals Review submissions Prepare subs for voting Resolution approvals Nov ‘07 Plan 282 editorial Following the Mar ‘08 meeting, assuming all comments are resolved and the WG approves them, Draft 4.0 will prepared by the Technical Editor based upon approved instructions to the editor in the Mar interim. Draft 4.0 will then be distributed as a 15 day WG recirculation letter ballot. 906 total to resolve Current

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 23 TGn Ad Hoc Organization Ad Hoc TopicAd hoc leaderIn Orlando Plenary? PHYVinko ErcegYes MACMatt FischerYes Coexistence Eldad PerahiaYes GeneralJoe LevyYes Beamforming & AdaptationJohn Ketchum Joonsuk Kim Yes TGnBruce KraemerYes EditorialAdrian StephensYes CA DocSheung LiNo

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 24 Draft 3.0 – Technical Comment Distribution (624 unique technical)

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 25 Comment Spreadsheets Ad Hoc TopicAd hoc leaderSpreadsheet file # Rev # Mar 16 1 pm Report file # CompositeTG MACMatt Fischer r19 CoexistenceEldad Perahia r9 PHYVinko Erceg r7 Beamforming & Adaptation John Ketchum Joonsuk Kim r5 GeneralJoe Levy EditorialAdrian Stephens r1 TGn allBruce Kraemer CA DocSheung Li 

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 26 Snapshot Progress Report 503 unresolved 190 incomplete At start of January Session At start of March ad hoc Resolutions Approved 137 reviewed in ad hoc 5 recycles 38 assigned Speculative Edits D3.04, D3.05

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 27 Draft 3.03 – Remaining Technical Comment Distribution

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 28 Speculative editing Comments approved in ad-hocs before the meeting have been speculatively edited. MAC: 25 comments (D3.04 Speculative edits 1) Coex: 110 comments (D3.04 Speculative edits 2) Beam: 2 comments (D3.05 Speculative edits)

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 29 TGn Document History LB 84 Comment Resolution 95LB Comment Resolution Jul ‘06Sep ‘06Nov ‘06Jan ‘07 Feb ‘07May ‘07 Mar ‘ July ‘07 Oct ‘07Nov ‘07 Sep ‘ Dec ‘ Feb ‘ Mar ‘ Mar ‘ Mar ‘ Mar ‘08

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 30 TGn Draft – Page History

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 31 TGn Voting & History

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 32 TGn Document History LB 84 D1.0 Comment Resolution 265 days D2.0 Comment Resolution 196 days 95LB 97 D3.0 Comment Resolution 146 days 115 Mar 09 ‘07 Oct 27 ‘07 Mar 21 ‘08 Sep 21 ‘07 Apr 2 9 ‘06 Jan 19 ‘07 D days 12x Apr 12 ‘08 Jul 18 ‘08 Ballot close Ballot authorization

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 33 TGn Resolution History LB 84 D1.0 Comment Resolution 265 days D2.0 Comment Resolution 196 days 95LB 97 D3.0 Comment Resolution 146 days 115 Mar 09 ‘07 Oct 27 ‘07 Mar 21 ‘08 Sep 21 ‘07 Apr 2 9 ‘06 Jan 19 ‘07 D days 12x Apr 12 ‘08 Jul 18 ‘08 Ballot close date Ballot Authorization date 13x Aug 05 ‘08 Sep 12 ‘08 D days 11.8/day 8.1/day 4.1/day 3.1/day 4.7/day Unique Technical Comment Resolution Rate CIDs/day

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 34

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 35 March WG11 Agenda am1 am2 pm1 pm2 lunch

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 36 TGn – Mar ‘08 Schedule Time MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursday am 1 8:00-10:00  Full TGn 8 am 2 10:30-12:30Full TGn 4  lunch12:30-13:30 pm 1 13:30-15:30   Full TGn 6  pm 2 16:00-18:00Full TGn 2  Full TGn 10 eve 19:30-21:30  Mar 17Mar 18Mar 19Mar 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 37 Agenda Plan and Topics Primary topic: Comment Resolution General Order – TGn Full with topics introduced by ad hoc where appropriate Monday – TGn summary, ad hoc status and comment resolution discussions –Strawpolls if useful Tuesday – Discussion and Votes Wednesday – Discussion and Votes Thursday - Voting on prepared comment resolutions Vote on Draft (if time allows) –Timeline review –Plans Teleconferences Approval of ad hoc in Jacksonville during May ‘08 Any other Business for the agenda?

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 38 Approve Agenda Motion to approve Mar ’08 TGn agenda as contained on slide (with any minuted amendments). Move: Second:

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 39 Technical Editor’s Report r1 Ad hoc reports

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 40 Thursday topics Plans from March to May Time Line Ad hoc meeting Teleconferences

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide day Ballot T0 Friday March 21 Friday March 28 T5 T0 = Closing Plenary T1 = Ballot start T2 = Ballot close Monday May 12 T1 Saturday April 12 T2 T3 Wednesday April day ballot Prepare submissions 23 days T2-T3 = Collect and categorize comment results T3 = 1 st TGn teleconference, submission assignees T4 = start of 2 day ad hoc T5 = Opening Interim Fri + Sat Ad hoc May 9+10 T

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide day Ballot T0 Friday March 21 Friday March 28 T5 T0 = Closing Plenary T1 = Ballot start T2 = Ballot close Monday May 12 T1 Thursday April 17 T2 T3 Monday April day ballot Prepare submissions 18 days T2-T3 = Collect and categorize comment results T3 = 1 st TGn teleconference, submission assignees T4 = start of 2 day ad hoc T5 = Opening Interim Would request for special telecon day for April 20 Fri + Sat Ad hoc May 9+10 T4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide Timeline Events Event NameCurrently Published Date ActualPredicted PAR Approved Sep ‘03 Initial WG Letter Ballot Mar ‘06 Recirculation WG Letter Ballot Oct ‘07 Form Sponsor Ballot Pool Mar ‘08 Initial Sponsor Ballot Jul ‘08 Recirculation Sponsor Ballot Nov ‘08 Final WG Approval Mar ‘09 Final EC Approval Mar ‘09 RevCom/ Stds Board Approval Jun ‘09 Publication Jul ‘09

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 44 TGn Teleconference Plan Wednesday Blocking events Ad hoc group Meeting chairBridge #Passcode Mar 19 Plenary Mar 26 Ballot Apr 02 Ballot Apr 09 Ballot Apr 16 Apr 20/23 Apr 30 May 07 Ad hoc? Mar 12 Interim Call number: Call time: 11:00 – 13:00 ET

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 45 Ad hoc in May 2008 Request authorization for TGn to hold an ad hoc on May 08, (Thu, Fri) in Jacksonville, FL, US with the venue of choice being the 802 Plenary conference hotel (Hyatt Regency Jacksonville) for the purpose of resolving comments received during LB12x on Draft 4.0

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 46

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 47

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 48 Any other business?

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 49

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 50

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 51 TGn – Mar ‘08 Schedule Time MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursday am 1 8:00-10:00  Full TGn 8 am 2 10:30-12:30Full TGn 4  lunch12:30-13:30 pm 1 13:30-15:30   Full TGn 6 Full TGn 10 pm 2 16:00-18:00Full TGn 2  eve 19:30-21:30  Mar 17Mar 18Mar 19Mar 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 52 Unfinished Business GF & DFS Conclude discussion of CID 5123 Evidence Presentation r1 Proposed Text r2 New Proposed Text r0 banning DFS Propose: 30 minutes then continue to motions Return to topic in this time block if time allows, otherwise continue Wednesday

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 53 Tuesday Motion Plan Ad hoc MotionsCIDsResolution Spreadsheet Beam Coex412, 2, 110, 3 (127) Gen PHY MAC71,16,2,16,4,5,13 (57) Editor Total190 MAC: 5558 in tab m Coex: 5123 in tab 4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 54 Tuesday Motion Results Ad hoc MotionsCIDsResolution Spreadsheet Beam Coex412, 2, 110, 3 (127) Gen PHY MAC71,16,2,16,4,5,13 (57) Editor Total190 MAC: 5558 in tab m Coex: 5123 in tab 4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 55 Wednesday Motion Plan Ad hoc MotionsCIDsResolution Spreadsheet Beam Coex Gen PHY MAC Editor Total3 Coex: 5123 in tab 4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 56 TGn – Mar ‘08 Schedule Time MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursday am 1 8:00-10:00  Full TGn 8 am 2 10:30-12:30Full TGn 4  lunch12:30-13:30 pm 1 13:30-15:30   Full TGn 6 Full TGn 10 pm 2 16:00-18:00Full TGn 2  eve 19:30-21:30  Mar 17Mar 18Mar 19Mar 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 57

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 58

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 59 TGn – Mar ‘08 Schedule Time MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursday am 1 8:00-10:00  Full TGn 8 am 2 10:30-12:30Full TGn 4  lunch12:30-13:30 pm 1 13:30-15:30   Full TGn 6 Full TGn 10 pm 2 16:00-18:00Full TGn 2  eve 19:30-21:30  Mar 17Mar 18Mar 19Mar 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 60 Draft Posting Draft 3.07 posted Contains all comment resolutions approved through Tuesday March 18. Draft Standards for Project IEEE n TASK GROUP/WORKING GROUP DRAFT Draft P802.11n_D3.07.pdf March 18, 2008 Draft P802.11n_D3.07.pdf TASK GROUP/WORKING SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION n-TGn redline D3.07 cmp D3.00. insertions & deletions.pdf March 18, n-TGn redline D3.07 cmp D3.00. insertions & deletions.pdf

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 61 Motion Move to approve P802.11n D3.07 as the TGn Draft. Move Adrian

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 62 Wednesday Motion Plan Ad hoc MotionsCIDsResolution Spreadsheet Beam Coex Gen PHY MAC Editor Total3 Coex: 5123 in tab 4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 63 Motion Move to amend the agenda to place a special order item to consider resolution as proposed by COEX ad hoc of 5123 & 5363 at 9:00 am on Thursday March 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 64

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 65 Unfinished Business Continue discussion of resolution proposals for CIDs 5123 & Presentation of r5 Revised presentation r2

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 66 Motion Move to amend the agenda to place a special order item to consider resolution as proposed by COEX ad hoc of 5123 & 5363 at 9:00 am on Thursday March 20

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission January 2007 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 67 Proposed Motion Having approved comment resolutions for all of the comments received from LB115 on Draft 3.0 and the technical editor having incorporated those into D 3.07, Move to rename D 3.07 to Draft 4.0 and begin as soon as possible, a 15 day Working Group Recirculation Ballot asking the technical question “Should n Draft 4.0 be forwarded to Sponsor Ballot?”

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 68 Thursday topics Plans from March to May Time Line Ad hoc meeting Teleconferences

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide day Ballot T0 Friday March 21 Friday March 28 T5 T0 = Closing Plenary T1 = Ballot start T2 = Ballot close Monday May 12 T1 Saturday April 12 T2 T3 Wednesday April day ballot Prepare submissions 23 days T2-T3 = Collect and categorize comment results T3 = 1 st TGn teleconference, submission assignees T4 = start of 2 day ad hoc T5 = Opening Interim Fri + Sat Ad hoc May 9+10 T

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide day Ballot T0 Friday March 21 Friday March 28 T5 T0 = Closing Plenary T1 = Ballot start T2 = Ballot close Monday May 12 T1 Thursday April 17 T2 T3 Monday April day ballot Prepare submissions 18 days T2-T3 = Collect and categorize comment results T3 = 1 st TGn teleconference, submission assignees T4 = start of 2 day ad hoc T5 = Opening Interim Would request for special telecon day for April 20 Fri + Sat Ad hoc May 9+10 T4

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide Timeline Events Event NameCurrently Published Date ActualPredicted PAR Approved Sep ‘03 Initial WG Letter Ballot Mar ‘06 Recirculation WG Letter Ballot Oct ‘07 Form Sponsor Ballot Pool Mar ‘08 Initial Sponsor Ballot Jul ‘08 Recirculation Sponsor Ballot Nov ‘08 Final WG Approval Mar ‘09 Final EC Approval Mar ‘09 RevCom/ Stds Board Approval Jun ‘09 Publication Jul ‘09

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 72 TGn Resolution History LB 84 D1.0 Comment Resolution 265 days D2.0 Comment Resolution 196 days 95LB 97 D3.0 Comment Resolution 146 days 115 Mar 09 ‘07 Oct 27 ‘07 Mar 21 ‘08 Sep 21 ‘07 Apr 2 9 ‘06 Jan 19 ‘07 D days 12x Apr 12 ‘08 Jul 18 ‘08 Ballot close date Ballot Authorization date 13x Aug 05 ‘08 Sep 12 ‘08 D days 11.8/day 8.1/day 4.1/day 3.1/day 4.7/day Unique Technical Comment Resolution Rate CIDs/day

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 73 Time Line proposal Change the date for formation of sponsor ballot pool to July 2008.

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 74 TGn Teleconference Plan Wednesday Blocking events Ad hoc group Meeting chairBridge #Passcode Mar 19 Plenary Mar 26 Ballot Apr 02 Ballot Apr 09 Ballot Apr 16TGn Apr 23 Apr 30 May 07Coex Mar 12 Interim Call number: Call time: 11:00 – 13:00 ET

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 75 Ad hoc in May 2008 Request authorization for TGn to hold an ad hoc on May 08, (Thu, Fri) in Jacksonville, FL, US with the venue of choice being the 802 Plenary conference hotel (Hyatt Regency Jacksonville) for the purpose of resolving comments received during LB12x on Draft 4.0

doc.: IEEE /0310r5 Submission March 2008 Bruce Kraemer, MarvellSlide 76