Project: IEEE 802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [DS-UWB PAR Comments Resolution] Date Submitted: [8Sept2004] Source: [John Barr] Company [Motorola] Address [1303 E. Golf Road, Schuamburg, IL 60196] Voice:[+1 847 576-8706], FAX: [+1 847 576-6758], E-Mail:[John.Barr@Motorola.com] Re: [15-04-0377-11-003a-consolidation-explanations-no-vote-confirmation.doc] Abstract: [Response to 802.15.3a No Vote Comments] Purpose: [Explain rationale for how one or more no votes for confirmation of DS-UWB merger #2 proposal have been addressed by the merger #2 comment resolution team.] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE 802.15. 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. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by 802.15. September 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.15-04/0454r0 Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola John Barr, Motorola

DS-UWB PAR Comments Resolution John R. Barr, Ph.D. John.Barr@Motorola.com Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Overview Summary of no voter comments regarding violation of the 802.15.3a PAR Clarification of what was included in Merger #2 proposal: 15-04-0137-03-003a-merger2-proposal-ds-uwb-update.doc Summary of TG3a PAR: http://standards.ieee.org/board/nes/projects/802-15-3a.pdf Proposed resolution of comments 4, 30, 66, 74, 153 Comments from no voters Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Summary of PAR Comments Roberto Aiello – The common signaling mode is in violation of the PAR. Mark Bowles - The inclusion of a common signaling mode violates the PAR as I understand it, so this would need to be removed from proposal #2 for me to consider changing my vote from no to yes. Manoj Choudhary - The removal of common signaling mode (which violates the PAR) from the proposal will make me to reconsider my vote. Jason Ellis and Dave Patton - The inclusion of a common signaling mode violates the PAR, so this would need to be removed from the proposal for me to want to change my vote to yes. Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Merger #2 Proposal: 04/137r3 The words ‘common’, ‘signaling’, and ‘CSM’ do not exist in 04/137r3. The following data rates are specified: Lower band: 28, 55, 110, 220, 500, 660, 1000, and 1320 Mbps (BPSK) and 110, 220, 500, 660, 1000, and 1320 (4-BOK) Upper band: 55, 110, 220, 500, 660, 1000, 1320 (BPSK) and 220, 660, 1000, and 1320 (4-BOK) CSM does not exist in Merger #2 Proposal at this time. Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Merger #2 Proposal Presentation: Portland 04/140R7 DS-UWB + option of [Common Signaling Mode (CSM) + MB-OFDM] The Merger #2 Proposal team was suggesting a path towards a compromise The following four slides with yellow headings are from 04/140R7 The fifth slide with the green heading was the start of the actual merger #2 proposal Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Overview of DS-UWB Proposal One of the goals of Merged Proposal #2 is DS-UWB and MB-OFDM harmonization & interoperability through a Common Signaling Mode (CSM) High rate modes using either DS-UWB or MB-OFDM Best characteristics of both approaches with most flexibility A piconet could have a pair of DS and a pair of MB devices CSM waveform provides control & interoperation between DS-UWB and MB-OFDM All devices work through an 802.15.3 MAC User/device only sees common MAC interface Hides the actual PHY waveform in use Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

The Common Signaling Mode: What Is The Goal? The common signaling mode (CSM) allows the 802.15.3 MAC to arbitrate between multiple UWB PHYs It is an “etiquette” to manage peaceful coexistence between the different UWB PHYs Multiple UWB PHYs will exist in the world DS-UWB & MB-OFDM are first examples CSM improves the case for international regulatory approval Common control mechanism for a multitude of applications Planned cooperation (i.e. CSM) gives far better QoS and throughput than allowing un-coordinated operation and interference CSM provides flexibility/extensibility within the IEEE standard Allows future growth & scalability Provides options to meet diverse application needs Enables interoperability and controls interference Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

What Does CSM Look Like? One of the MB-OFDM bands! Proposed Common Signaling Mode Band (500+ MHz bandwidth) 9-cycles per BPSK “chip” DS-UWB Low Band Pulse Shape (RRC) 3-cycles per BPSK “chip” 3978 Frequency (MHz) 3100 5100 MB-OFDM (3-band) Theoretical Spectrum Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

CSM Specifics We have designed a specific waveform for the CSM BPSK modulation for simple and reliable performance Length 24 spreading codes using 442 MHz chip rate Harmonically related center frequency of 3978 MHz Rate ½ convolutional code with k=6 Provides 9.2 Mbps throughput Extendable up to 110 Mbps using variable code and FEC rates 802.15.3 MAC works great with CSM CSM can be used for control and beaconing Negligible impact on piconet throughput (beacons are <1%) Requires negligible additional cost/complexity for either radio MB-OFDM already has a DS mode that is used for synchronization This proposal is based on DS-UWB operating with a 26 MHz cell-phone crystal Very low cost yet terrific phase-noise and accuracy (see GSM spec) Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Overview of DS-UWB Proposal DS-UWB proposed as a radio for handheld with low-cost, ultra high-rate, ultra low-power, BPSK modulation using variable length spreading codes Scales to 1+ Gbps with low power - essential for mobile & handheld applications Much lower complexity and power consumption Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Summary of TG3a PAR "To provide a standard for a low complexity, low cost, low power consumption alternate PHY for 802.15.3 (comparable to the goals for 802.15.3). The data rate will be high enough, 110 Mbps or more (see 18a), to satisfy an evolutionary set of consumer multi-media industry needs for WPAN communications. The project will address the requirements to support multimedia data types in multiple compliant co-located systems and also coexistence (18b).", and the key sentence in 18a states "In addition to at least 110 Mbps data rate, additional data rates, both lower and higher, may be supported.“ Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

How CSM Does Satisfy 802.15.3a PAR To satisfy the 802.15.3a PAR the standard could include CSM plus at least one 110 Mbps mode (either DS-UWB or MB-OFDM) as mandatory. 802.15.3a is an addendum to Std 802.15.3-2003 which must include all of the ALT PHY dependent specifications required to support interoperability between devices that conform to Std 802.15.3-2003 as amended by 802.15.3a. This will include any additions to MAC functionality required to support the new ALT PHY, a new PHY Specification (another chapter similar to the current 2.4 GHz PHY Specification), PHY and MAC specific PICS for the ALT PHY, and additional general description text (e.g. 5.4 Characteristics of the 2.4 GHz PHY). The addendum text for 802.15.3a could include the appropriate text defining how CSM is to be used to allow multiple higher rate PHY modes to operate in the same piconet. A PHY within IEEE 802 does not need to use a single modulation technique nor is it necessary for all conforming implementations to include all of the modulation techniques defined in a standard. It is only necessary to conform to mandatory modes and implement optional modes according to the specifications in the standard. Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

NOT Multiple PHYS IEEE 802.15 standards define how products interoperate in a wireless environment Mandatory portions of a specification required in all implementations Optional portions of a specification shall be implemented as defined in the specification and are included to satisfy operational requirements Mandatory level of interoperability implied for every device implemented to conform to an IEEE standard. Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Proposed Resolution of No Comments Since 04/137r3 does not include a CSM, all of the comments are accepted in principle. We have also shown that the CSM does not violate the PAR, and a compromise proposal including a CSM is a viable option for IEEE 802.15.3a. Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola

Comments from No Voters Roberto Aiello, Mark Bowles, Manoj Chaudhary, Jason Ellis, and Dave Patton: Do you accept this resolution? Dr. John R. Barr, Motorola