Wi-Fi Bluetooth Automotive Coexistence Use Cases Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 January 2018 Wi-Fi Bluetooth Automotive Coexistence Use Cases Date:2018-01-11 Authors: Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.19. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Jim Lansford, Qualcomm John Doe, Some Company

Big Picture – use cases January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 For purposes of this discussion, we’ll assume both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth traffic fall into two basic categories: Wi-Fi High priority - EDCA access categories AC3 (AC_VO) and AC2 (AC_VI) Low priority – EDCA access categories AC1 (AC_BE) and AC0 (AC_BK) AP vs STA vs GO Bluetooth (Bluetooth 4.0 basline) Scans for BT/BLE Synchronous Connection Oriented (SCO and eSCO) Asynchronous Connectionless (ACL) Note that A2DP is a special case of an ACL link BLE operation Advertising vs data channels Other issues Co-located vs non co-located Collaborative vs non-collaborative Some use cases may require collaborative techniques, some may not Submission Slide 2 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Use case matrix Issues: Use case/type Wi-Fi High Priority January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Use case/type Wi-Fi High Priority Wi-Fi Low Priority Bluetooth SCO Case 1: Priority conflict Case 2: BT Voice vs Wi-Fi data Bluetooth ACL Case 3: Wi-Fi multimedia vs BT data Case 4: Non-priority Bluetooth LE Case 5: BLE defers Case 6: Best effort Issues: Wi-Fi could be operating as an AP, STA or GO Bluetooth could be operating as a master or slave Performance metrics have not been defined eSCO has some attributes of SCO and ACL eSCO offers better voice quality when there are packet errors Submission Slide 3 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 1: Priority conflict January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples: Back seat passenger is doing a video conference (like Facetime) over the in-vehicle Wi- Fi at 2.4GHz while the driver is using Bluetooth for a hands-free call. Bluetooth headsets being used in the vehicle independent of the IVI, but interfering with the in-vehicle Wi-Fi (also impacts Use Case 4) Issue: Bluetooth voice quality and Miracast QoS could be difficult to maintain when sharing the 2.4GHz band, especially if there is interference from outside the vehicle Submission Slide 4 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 2: BT Voice vs Wi-Fi data January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples Driver is using Bluetooth hands-free to make a call while passengers surf the web using the in-vehicle hotspot at 2.4GHz Issue: Bluetooth voice quality eSCO will retry a voice packet if there is an error Submission Slide 5 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 3: Wi-Fi multimedia vs BT data January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples In-vehicle IVI system is streaming Miracast video to rear screens in the 2.4GHz band while phone uploads address book to head unit Issue: Wi-Fi Miracast video/audio quality Submission Slide 6 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 4: Non-priority January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples BLE TPMS sensors send tire pressure information to telematics unit while users in the car surf the web Special case – A2DP Phone streams music via Bluetooth A2DP to IVI system while passengers surf the web Issue: Throughput may be affected - Streaming services that use Best Effort or background priority in Wi-Fi may have buffer depth issues. Buffer depth may also be an issue for A2DP. Submission Slide 7 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 5: Wi-Fi multimedia vs BLE data January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples In-vehicle IVI system is streaming Miracast video to rear screens in the 2.4GHz band while BLE TPMS sends tire pressure data Miracast audio is streaming to rear speakers while BLE is used as A/V control Issue: Wi-Fi Miracast video/audio quality Submission Slide 8 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Case 6: Wi-Fi best effort vs BLE data January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Examples User is surfing the web using the in-vehicle hotspot in the 2.4GHz band while BLE TPMS sends tire pressure data Submission Slide 9 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm

Conclusion January 2018 doc.: IEEE 802.19-18/0005r0 Use cases will be valuable for 802.19.2 to develop a recommended practice Some use cases may require co-located and collaborative coexistence techniques Some use cases can be enabled with non co-located, non- collaborative techniques (e.g. adaptive frequency hopping) Performance metrics and desired goals for performance have not been defined Submission Slide 10 Jim Lansford, Qualcomm