doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 IEEE Regulatory SC DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team Summary of activities since Nov F2F Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 SubmissionJim Lansford, CSR Technology Abstract Summary of activities in the IEEE (Regulatory Standing Committee) DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team since the November F2F in San Antonio, and plans for completion of the Tiger Team’s work. January 2015 Slide 2

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Background FCC allocated 75MHz of spectrum in the 5.9GHz band ( MHz) for Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) in October 1999  In FCC NPRM (13-49), the FCC requested comments on a potential sharing of the DSRC band, to understand if a feasible sharing solution that protects DSRC users could be developed.  DSRC would remain as a primary user of the band  The new band would be designated U-NII ac could be modified to operate in this new UNII-4 band if approved by the FCC FCC did not specify the framework or etiquette by which band sharing would occur January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 3

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Motion to approve minutes Moved that the Regulatory Standing Committee approve the minutes of the DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team from the conference calls on: December 12, 2014 (document 15/176r0) December 19, 2014 (document 15/177r0) January 9, 2015 (document 15/178r0) Moved by: Jim Lansford Second: John Notor Approved? By unanimous consent January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 4

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Activities since November F2F Published draft of final report on Dec 12 – coexistence-tiger-team.docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/14/ reg-final-report-of-dsrc- coexistence-tiger-team.docx Comment collection spreadsheet published – spreadsheet-for-dsrc-coex-tt-final-report.xlshttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/14/ reg-comment-collection- spreadsheet-for-dsrc-coex-tt-final-report.xls Straw poll questions discussed and finalized during calls on Dec 19 and Jan 9 – tiger-team-19-dec-2014.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/14/ reg-agenda-for-dsrc-coexistence- tiger-team-19-dec-2014.ppt European submission by Spaandermann, et al to be integrated into document Comments received – tt-final-report-consolidated-comments.xlshttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/15/ reg-dsrc-coex- tt-final-report-consolidated-comments.xls January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 5

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #1 Objective of the Tiger Team: “Create a document that describes and quantifies possible coexistence mechanisms between DSRC and extensions of the base standard in the proposed UNII-4 band, if the FCC allows such band sharing in a future R&O.” Do you believe that sharing of the 5.9GHz band by unlicensed (Part 15) devices should be allowed? Yes No Needs more study No opinion January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 6

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #2 Regarding the proposal in document 13/994r0 by Peter Ecclesine of Cisco Systems devices.docx {additional links?} Do you believe this proposed band sharing technique has merit and, after developing a more complete definition and field testing, should be considered a basis for a band sharing solution? Yes No Not enough information/needs more study No opinion January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 7

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #3 Regarding the proposal in document 13/1449r2 by Tevfik Yucek of Qualcomm (and others) coexistence.pptx {additional links?} Do you believe this proposed band sharing technique has merit and, after developing a more complete definition and field testing, should be considered a basis for a band sharing solution? Yes No Not enough information/needs more study No opinion January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 8

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #4 Which proposal do you support for further specification development and field testing? The 13/994r0 proposal by Ecclesine [1] The 13/1449r2 proposal by Yucek [1] I support a combination of both proposals with additional details added I believe further study of both proposals independently is needed Neither – I do not support any band sharing While I support band sharing, I do not believe either approach can form the basis for an acceptable band sharing solution – we need something different January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 9 Note 1: Both proposals will need additional development before field testing

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #5 If it would enhance band sharing, would you support a proposal to move the V2V Safety Channel (currently in Channel 172) to one of the upper channels (180, 182, or 184)? (Note: this could require a rule change) Yes No Not enough information I don’t support band sharing No opinion January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 10

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #6 Would you support a proposal to use one of the upper channels (180/182/184) for BSM traffic instead of Channel 172? (No rule change. Part 95 still applies to Channel 172. Channel 172 would be shared with Part 15 devices) Yes No Not enough information I don’t support band sharing No opinion January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 11

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #7 January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 12 DSRC Band DSRC Channels Wi-Fi Channels 160MHz 80MHz If band sharing is allowed, would you prefer that the upper edge of the U-NII4 band be at GHz (all 75MHz) or GHz (only the lower 45MHz)? Only lower 45MHz All 75MHz No opinion I do not support band sharing Lower 45MHz All 75MHz

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #8 If sharing is only allowed in the lower 45MHz portion of the band ( MHz), should DSRC only use 20MHz channels in that shared portion of the band? (Note: Channels 172 & 178 in Part 95 are defined as 10MHz in bandwidth, so a rule change may be required) Yes – only 20MHz DSRC channels in the shared band No – DSRC should use 10MHz channels No opinion I do not support band sharing January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 13

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Straw poll question #9 If a Clear Channel Assessment approach is adopted as outlined in document 13/994r0 by Ecclesine, would unlicensed devices need to vacate the entire MHz band after detecting a DSRC signal on one channel within the band in order for sharing to be feasible? Yes – unlicensed devices would need to vacate the entire shared band ( MHz) after detecting a DSRC signal on one channel No – unlicensed devices could still operate in other parts of the shared band ( MHz) after detecting a DSRC signal on one channel No opinion I do not support band sharing January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 14

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Future Work Anticipated Work Going Forward Work through comment resolution on draft of final report Finalize distribution list for straw polls Run straw polls using Survey Monkey –Comment fields in each question –Poll will be launched ASAP after call on January 30 Integrate Straw Poll results into Final Report (Section 11) –Comments will be folded into final report –Name and affiliation will be included unless the respondent opts out Submit final report to REG SC for approval –Straw poll among DSRC Coex TT to indicate approval to release document to REG SC –Final REG SC vote and future actions discussion in March at F2F in Berlin January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 15

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission References FCC NPRM (changes to 5GHz band rules, including proposed UNII-4 band): – FCC Comments FCC Reply Comment framework document – framework.dochttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ reg-fcc reply-comment- framework.doc FCC Comments survey – FCC Reply Comments – re-5-ghz-nprm-fcc-et docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.18/dcn/13/ draft-reply-comments-of-ieee-802- re-5-ghz-nprm-fcc-et docx Letter to FCC OET from IEEE 802 regarding DSRC Coexistence Tiger Team activities – oet.docx oet.docx DSRC Summary – January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 16

doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission References (2/2) IEEE submissions on DSRC (since p was ratified) – coexistence.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ wng p-dsrc-and ac- coexistence.ppt – – – devices.docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ reg-proposal-for-u-nii-4- devices.docx – band.pptxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ reg-proposal-for-sharing-in-unii-4- band.pptx – systems.pptxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ reg-harmful-interference-to-dsrc- systems.pptx – – coexistence.pptxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/ reg-proposal-for-dsrc-band- coexistence.pptx – – – – – movement-in-connected-vehicles.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/14/ reg-communication-and-data- movement-in-connected-vehicles.ppt – channelization-proposal-for-dsrc-band-coexistence.pptxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/14/ reg-technical-discussion-on-re- channelization-proposal-for-dsrc-band-coexistence.pptx – January 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 17 Bold text indicates proposal submissions