Agenda for PDED Ad Hoc meeting in San Antonio in September 2016 July 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0xxxr0 Agenda for PDED Ad Hoc meeting in San Antonio in September 2016 31 Oct 2016 Authors: Name Company Phone email Andrew Myles Cisco +61 2 84461010 +61 418 656587 amyles@cisco.com Andrew Myles, Cisco Andrew Myles, Cisco

Welcome to the first (last. ) F2F meeting of the IEEE 802 Welcome to the first (last?) F2F meeting of the IEEE 802.11 PDED Ad Hoc PDED stands for Preamble Detect Energy Detect PDED is an attempt to encapsulate the goal of the group … … which is to discuss issues related to the 3GPP RAN1 request to IEEE 802.11 WG to adopt an ED of -72dBm The IEEE 802.11 PDED Ad Hoc was formed in September 2016 at the Warsaw interim meeting Andrew Myles was appointed as Chair We will be meeting twice this week Tuesday AM2 Thursday PM1 Andrew Myles, Cisco

The first task for the PDED ad hoc today is to appoint a secretary It is important to keep proper minutes of all PDED meetings However, it is generally not practical to Chair a meeting and take minutes at the same time Especially without a recording  Therefore we need a volunteer for a Secretary At least for this session … … and thanks to Thomas Derham & Dick Roy for volunteering during the teleconferences The rewards for the Secretary are numerous Power over the ad hoc Respect from your peers … and a beverage from the Chair Andrew Myles, Cisco

The PDED ad hoc will review the official IEEE-SA patent material for pre-PAR groups 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 or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of 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. Andrew Myles, Cisco

The PDED ad hoc will review the official IEEE-SA patent material for pre-PAR groups If you have questions: Contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org Visit standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/index.html See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 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: development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/slideset.ppt Andrew Myles, Cisco

Links are available to a variety of other useful resources July 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0xxxr0 Links are available to a variety of other useful resources Link to IEEE Disclosure of Affiliation http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html Links to IEEE Antitrust Guidelines http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf Link to IEEE Code of Ethics http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html Link to IEEE Patent Policy http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt Andrew Myles, Cisco Andrew Myles, Cisco

July 2010 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/0xxxr0 The PDED ad hoc will operate using accepted principles of meeting etiquette IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization Meetings shall be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization Individuals shall address the “technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about others Andrew Myles, Cisco Andrew Myles, Cisco

The PDED ad hoc will consider a proposed agenda Bureaucratic stuff Done! Why was the PDED ad hoc formed? Quick summary What happened at the teleconferences? What is happening this week? What are the next steps? Possible proposal to Friday plenary Any objections to this agenda? Andrew Myles, Cisco

Why was the PDED ad hoc formed? Andrew Myles, Cisco

The formation of the ad hoc was based on a LS from 3GPP RAN1 and documents presents to 802.19/11 Original liaison from 3GPP RAN1 IEEE 802 liaison to 3GPP RAN Made original request IEEE 802 documents pre-ad hoc 19-16-0110-00 by Andrew Myles Described issue and a variety of possible responses in IEEE 802.19 WG 11-16-1263-00 by Andrew Myles Summarised issue for IEEE 802.11 WG; led to ad hoc Andrew Myles, Cisco

3GPP RAN1 & IEEE 802 are having an ongoing discussion related to LAA’s ED threshold From 11-16-1263-00 The IEEE 802 review of LAA Rel. 13 resulted in IEEE 802 requesting 3GPP RAN1 to make LAA more sensitive to 802.11 transmissions: See Comment 3 in 19-16-0037-09 for details (March 2016) 3GPP RAN1 rejected the request on the basis that they have had considerable debate and have agreed there is not a problem, but without responding to the particular issues raised by IEEE 802 See Response 3 in R1-166040 (June 2016) IEEE 802 responded by noting that 3GPP RAN1’s assertions are based on invalid assumptions about common 802.11 deployments and asking 3GPP RAN1 to rerun their simulations with more realistic assumptions See IEEE 802 liaison to 3GPP RAN (August 2016) The issue is currently still open and unresolved … Andrew Myles, Cisco

3GPP RAN1 are now requesting that 802 3GPP RAN1 are now requesting that 802.11 also adopt a lowered ED threshold of -72dBm From 11-16-1263-00 In R1-166040 (June 2016), 3GPP RAN1 further suggested that 802.11 be redefined to also use an ED of -72dBm in the future ... … rather than the currently defined ED of -62dBm (and PD of -82dBm) Such a change would mean that 802.11 would defer to LAA (and 802.11) at the same ED threshold that LAA currently defers to 802.11 RAN1 respectfully requests future IEEE 802.11 technologies to align the energy detection threshold used with other technologies operating in the same unlicensed band, e.g., -72 dBm. An energy detection threshold of -72 dBm has been chosen by 3GPP for Rel-13 LAA also with an interest in aligning with other technologies in the future. Andrew Myles, Cisco

IEEE 802 have not yet responded to 3GPP RAN1’s request for 802 IEEE 802 have not yet responded to 3GPP RAN1’s request for 802.11 to use ED threshold of -72dBm From 11-16-1263-00 In July 2016, IEEE 802.19 WG focused on responding to 3GPP RAN1’s responses on the twelve open issues in IEEE 802’s March 2016 liaison It did not respond to 3GPP RAN1’s request for ED = -72dBm In Sept 2016, a thought piece was presented to IEEE 802.19 WG that discussed some possible responses to 3GPP RAN1’s request See 19-16-0110-00 (by Andrew Myles, the author of this summary) After discussion in the IEEE 802.19 WG, there was consensus that the request really needs to be considered by IEEE 802.11 WG It is probably of particular interest to IEEE 802.11 TGax from a technical perspective A timely response probably requires IEEE 802 to develop a response out of the Nov 2016 plenary Although it was suggested by an 802.19 participant that IEEE 802 could simply ignore the request Andrew Myles, Cisco

There are many related issues that need to be addressed before responding to 3GPP RAN1 From 11-16-1263-00 Some potential related (mostly technical) issues What is the effect of ED = -72dBm on billions of legacy devices? Does an ED = -72 dBm make sense when 802.11ax is focusing on improved frequency reuse? Should IEEE 802 continue recommending that LAA should be more sensitive to 802.11 transmissions? Should IEEE 802 recommend that LAA adopt 802.11 ED/PD levels? Should IEEE 802 recommend that LAA use 802.11 preambles (or CTS-to-self wrappers) to make it easier for 802.11 to detect LAA? How should IEEE 802 deal with related proposals in ETSI BRAN that the next revision of EN 301 893 specify an ED = -72dBm? … Andrew Myles, Cisco

How should IEEE 802.11 WG consider the issues related to 3GPP RAN1’s request for a new 802.11 ED? From 11-16-1263-00 Some options for IEEE 802.11 WG action (out of Nov plenary?) Do nothing - few Leave it to IEEE 802.19 WG - none Ask IEEE 802.11 TGax to consider the request - some And associated issues Establish an IEEE 802.11 WG ad hoc to consider the request - many … others? Votes for different option during straw poll during Wednesday plenary in Warsaw (from memory) Andrew Myles, Cisco

It was noted at the 1st teleconference that EN 301 893 is another reason to consider the ED question The next version of EN 301 893 is likely to require an ED of -72dBm, but has an exception to allow ED of -62dBm for IEEE 802.11ac EN 301 893 documents requirements for Europe and other parts of the world The following version of EN 301 893 may require an ED of -72dBm, with no exception for any version if IEEE 802.11ax This is subject to an evaluation at the time The blanket rule is in the interests of “technology neutrality” This suggests it might be a good idea to evaluate the pro’s and con’s of an ED of -72dBm now It will inform development efforts for IEEE 802.1ax in general but particularly in the context of frequency reuse It will inform the ETSI BRAN evaluation of the next EN 301 893 revision … Andrew Myles, Cisco

What happened at the teleconferences? Andrew Myles, Cisco

There have been a series of teleconferences before this plenary meeting in San Antonio The PDED ad hoc held teleconferences Tuesday, 27 Sep @ 2pm PT Tuesday, 4 Oct @ 2pm PT (cancelled; lack of submissions) Tuesday, 11 Oct @ 2pm PT Tuesday, 18 Oct @ 2pm PT (cancelled; clashed with WFA meeting) Tuesday, 25 Oct @ 2pm PT Tuesday, 1 Nov @ 2pm PT (cancelled; to alllow prep for San Antonio) Andrew Myles, Cisco

The first teleconference introduced the group and proposed at least one path forward First teleconference (27 Sept 2016) details Agenda Minutes (any objections to the minutes?) First teleconference summary Chair introduced aims of group Chair summarised the 3GPP RAN1 request for ED of -72dBm Chair noted that ETSI BRAN activities suggests IEEE 802.11 is going to have to deal with this issue at some point Chair suggested an evaluation mechanism based on testing/simulation Chair made call for submissions/ideas Andrew Myles, Cisco

The third teleconference introduced the group and proposed at least one path forward Third teleconference (11 Oct 2016) details Agenda Minutes (any objections to the minutes?) Third teleconference summary Chair introduced aims of group Brainstorming PD is important for legacy 802.11, and likely for frequency re-use in 802.11ax LAA does not use PD despite previous suggestions from 802.11 ETSI not relevant to question about whether PD should be used Agreed that the RAN1 request for -72dBm is shorthand Chair made a request for future submissions Andrew Myles, Cisco

The fifth teleconference introduced the group and proposed at least one path forward Fifth teleconference (25 Oct 2016) details Agenda Minutes (any objections to the minutes?) Fifth teleconference summary Thomas Derham (Broadcom) presented 16/1344r0 proposing a response IEEE 802 should respond to 3GPP stating the request is noted IEEE 802 should reiterate its position that LAA adopting 802.11 PD and reservation signaling (e.g. CTS-to-self) is the best solution for coexistence in the 5 GHz band IEEE 802 and 3GPP may continue to study, communicate and collaborate towards optimizing coexistence between their respective technologies in the 5 GHz band Thomas agreed to write the first draft of a response (with assistance from Andrew Myles) Andrew Myles, Cisco

What is happening this week? Andrew Myles, Cisco

What is happening this week? Depends on presentations proposed Andrew Myles, Cisco

What are the next steps? Andrew Myles, Cisco

What are the next steps? Letter to 3GPP RAN1 notifying them of the activity Need to draft letter Thomas Derham (and Andrew Myles) will do this Andrew Myles, Cisco

The PDED ad hoc meeting is adjourned! Andrew Myles, Cisco