Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 March 2015 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide PAR Review March 2015 Date: Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 March 2015 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 2 Abstract-Snapshot Review of Proposed PAR documents 802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSDPARCSD 802.1Qci- Amendment, Per-Stream Filtering and Policing, PAR and CSDPARCSD 802.1Qcj- Amendment, Automatic Attachment to Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) services, PAR and CSDPARCSD 802.3bq- Amendment, PAR Modification Request and CSDPAR Modification RequestCSD 802.3bz- Amendment, 2.5 Gb/s and 5 Gb/s, PAR and CSDPARCSD ay- Amendment: Enhancements for Ultra High Throughput in and around the 60 GHz Band, PAR and CSDPARCSD e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point communications, PAR and CSDPARCSD Privacy Recommendation EC Study Group - Privacy Considerations for IEEE 802 Technologies, PAR and CSDPARCSD IoT New TG request Meeting times: Monday PM2, Tuesday AM2, Thursday AM2

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 PAR SC – November 2014 Chair: Jon Rosdahl Monday Agenda: 1.Welcome 2.Determine order of review 3.Review PARs/CSD posted for review this week. 4.Recess Tuesday Agenda: 1.Complete review of PARs/CSD and post comments to 802 WGs 2.Recess Thursday Agenda: 1.Review Response to Comments 2.Prepare Report for WG closing plenary 3.Adjourn Slide 3Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSDPARCSD 2.1 Expand Acronym “MAC” – “Media Access Control (MAC)” 5.2b Change “local address space” to “local MAC address space” 5.4 – Change “unique addresses” to “unique MAC addresses” – Change “local address” to “local MAC address”- 3 places. Slide 4Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR (cont)PAR 5.4 – Problem statement not clearly defined in the need statement. “While we agree that the number of IoT devices may use more of the Local MAC Address space, please explain in the need section why the Local MAC Address space requires the simultaneous use of Multiple Local MAC Address Administrators.” 6.1b – CID is not defined and is only used once…just spell it out “Company Identifier ” 5.2b and 6.1b – “Company ID” – Should be “Company Identifier” (2 instances) Slide 5Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, CSDCSD Compatibility – Just say “Yes”, delete the rest. Distinct Identity – Suggested change: “There are no guidelines for using the Local MAC Address space in existing standards.” Technical Feasibility – Check the cited standard (possibly incorrect citation format) and include the full name of standard inline or as a note. Economic Feasibility – change “...local address distribution or claiming…” to “…local MAC Address distribution or claiming…” Slide 6Jon Rosdahl, CSR”… March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r Qci- Amendment, Per-Stream Filtering and Policing, PAR and CSD PARCSD No Comment Slide 7Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r Qcj- Amendment, Automatic Attachment to Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) services, PAR and CSDPAR CSD 5.2 Scope – First use of LAN/VLAN/MAC should have been spelled out…WG may consider for revision project, we understand that it was missed when the base standard PAR was approved. 5.2b Change “TLVs” to “TLV” 5.4 expand LAN if not changing scope statement. Slide 8Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r bq- Amendment, PAR Modification Request and CSDPAR Modification Request CSD No Comment Slide 9Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r bz- Amendment, 2.5 Gb/s and 5 Gb/s, PAR and CSDPAR CSD No comment Slide 10Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r ay- Amendment: Enhancements for Ultra High Throughput in and around the 60 GHz Band, PAR and CSDPAR CSD Other 802 WGs will Provide feedback to ay for response. Slide 11Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point communications, PAR and CSDPARCSD 5.2a – “high rate” – What is high rate? –consider changing to “high rate (up to 100Gbps)” “Data rates are high enough” Not defined enough for a scope statement. 5.4 – “High” and “Low” are relative terms that should be defined as what is “High” or “Low” reword without “high” or “low” “Wireless switched point-to-point” – what is this? Does “switched” relate to a packet or connection type switch? Should intra-device really be inter-device? Wireless backhaul/fronthaul? – what is meant by this? Slide 12Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point communications, PAR and CSDPARCSD 7.1 Similar Scope – ad and ay are similar. Please note similarities and differences. CSD: Broad sets of applicability: “high rate” –nebulous – give range to define what is “high rate” Multiple vendors: Please answer the question about the market potential not the attendees affiliations don’t list the corporations in the CSD, but do cite reference to the evidence alluded to c) do not use “Wi-Fi” change to “WLAN” or delete Slide 13Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 Privacy Recommendation EC Study Group - Privacy Considerations for IEEE 802 Technologies, PAR and CSDPARCSD 4.2 and 4.3 need to include target dates for completion. Should be at least 6 months apart. 5.2 Change “document” to “recommended practice” 5.4 delete “document” result “The recommended practice…” 5.5 change “and certain threats” to “and certain privacy threats” 5.5 change “with IETF in many” to “with IETF on many” 5.5 change “guidelines” to “recommendations” CSD: Distinct Identity: change “defines privacy” to “defines a privacy” and “practice” to “practices” Economic Feasibility – Question was not answered need to provide evidence and address the requested specific areas “a) through e)”. Slide 14Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 IEEE approved a scope document for a new IEEE TAG Task Group focused on Internet of things (IoT) vertical applications. The document was approved 7/0/0 by IEEE and can be found at: I expect to bring this for approval during the Friday closing meeting during the March plenary. According to the procedure adopted by the IEEE 802 EC, such documents need to be circulated 30 days in advance of the plenary meeting. Comments from WGs are due by 6:30 pm local time on Tuesday during the plenary meeting. Responses from IEEE are due by 6:30 pm local time on Wednesday during the plenary meeting. Members of IEEE will be seeking votes of support from IEEE 802 WGs during the week. I will advise the appropriate WG Chairs when such a motion will be requested. Slide 15Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r IoT New TG request feedback 1.Scope – missing “.” at end of Scope. 2.Customer – ‘Customer’ is what is being asked to be identified…please identify “who the customer” is to answer the question. 3.Similar Groups – What are the “in identified IoT vertical applications”? What are the liaison opportunities? Would a liaison with “IEEE P2413” be one of those opportunities? What about any opportunities with those groups identified in #4? Slide 16Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1 Motion to Send Feedback to 802 WGs Move to send feedback prepared by PAR Review SC to the respective IEEE 802 WGs as documented in /0229r1. Moved: Dan Harkins 2 nd : Michelle Turner Results: motion passes. Slide 17Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2015

Submission doc.: IEEE /0229r1March 2015 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 18 References