1. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 1 TGg Report to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Matthew B. Shoemake TGg Chairperson January 25, 2002

2. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 2 Status Heard multiple submissions related to the IEEE 802.11g Draft 1.1 Topics of submissions include: –MAC interfacing parameters –RF performance requirements –Coexistence statement Documentation error notice: –An incorrect version of “Draft 1.1 in MS Word format without tracking” was placed on the web site and server. This has been corrected in both location. There was no error in the posting of “Draft 1.1 in PDF Format” or “Draft 1.1 in MS Word format with tracking” Draft 2.1 has been on server since 4:00pm on Wednesday the 23 rd Draft 2.1 incorporates technical changes from 7 motions passed on the 22 nd and 23 rd Motions passed thus far are summarized on the remaining slides –Exact wording of the motions that passed is contained in the 802.11g minutes

3. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 3 Motion passed to instruct the editor to add text to section 9.6 as follows: “All Control frames shall be transmitted at one of the rates in the BSS basic rate set so that they will be understood by all STAs in the BSS. For the IEEE 802.11g PHY, Control Response frames shall be sent at one of the Extended Rate PHY (ERP) mandatory rates in response to an OFDM frame as described below. “To allow the transmitting STA to calculate the contents of the Duration/ID field, the responding STA shall transmit its Control Response and Management Response frames (either CTS or ACK) at the highest rate in the BSS basic rate set that is less than or equal to the rate of at the same rate as the immediately previous frame in the frame exchange sequence (as defined in 9.7). In addition, the Control Response frame shall be sent using the same PHY options as the received frame. For the IEEE 802.11g PHY, if the received frame was sent at an OFDM rate, the Control Response frame shall be sent at the highest mandatory ERP rate that is less than or equal to the rate of the received frame.”

4. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 4 Motion passed on aCWmin Instruct the editor to add a sub clause 19.4.3.8.5 specifying to use the table in sub clause 18.3.3 for the MAC timing calculation, with the following changes: –Use an aCWmin value of 15 unless in device is capabible of rates greater than 20Mbps in which case 31 will be used –aMACProcessingDelay is < 2us

5. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 5 Motion passed to: Add a new clause to 7.3.2 (7.3.2.last+1) containing the following text: –The legacy indication element provides 802.11 stations with an indication of the presence of legacy stations in the BSS. See Figure xx. Stations may use this information to control their use of protection mechanisms (such as RTS / CTS) for OFDM frames. An Access Point shall generate this element in each Beacon Frame. The AP shall set bit 0 to a “0” if no 802.11b stations are associated. The AP shall set bit 0 to a “1” if any 802.11b stations are associated. The AP shall set bit 1 to the same value as bit 0 unless it is providing additional, optional information. If optional information is provided, it shall be according to this table: The editor is requested to assign a unique element ID. Bit 0Bit 1Meaning 00No 802.11b legacy stations are associated, and the AP suggests that protection mechanisms are not currently needed. 01No 802.11b legacy stations are associated, but the AP recommends the use of protection mechanisms 10802.11b legacy stations are associated, but the AP suggests that protection mechanisms are not currently needed. 11802.11b legacy stations are associated, and the AP recommends the use of protection mechanisms Element ID Length =1 b0b1rrrrrr B0B7 One Octet Figure xx: Legacy Indication Element

6. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 6 Motion passed on the signal extension for ERP/OFDM Add a sub clause 19.4.3.8.6 to state that the packet is followed by a Signal Extension Field which is quiet time (no carrier) of 6 microseconds.

7. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 7 Motion passed to instruct the editor to change the TXtime equation for ERP/OFDM Change the Txtime equation in 19.4.4.1 (which is currently a copy of the.11a definition) to add the 6 us Signal extension. The new equation would be: TXTIME =T PREAMBLE +T SIGNAL +T SYM *Ceiling((16 + 8*LENGTH + 6 )/ N DBPS )+Signal Extension Where Signal Extension is defined as 6 microseconds.

8. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 8 Motion passed on the signal extension for CCK-OFDM Change sub clause 19.6.2.4.1 to state that the Signal Extension is quiet time (no carrier). Change figure 19.6.2.4.1 to indicate that the Signal Extension is quiet time Change sub clause 19.6.2.4.5 to specify that the Signal Extension is quiet time.

9. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 9 Motion Passed to Introduce Coexistence Statement Instruct the Editor to add the following text to the TGg draft standard: The 2.45 GHz media is a shared media and co-existence with other devices such as IEEE 802.11b is an important issue for maintaining high performance in 802.11g devices. By design, 802.11g coexists with 802.11b and as a result coexists with all approved IEEE standards for the 2.45 GHz band. In addition, the mandatory and optional waveforms utilized by 802.11g are inherently robust against more general interference sources. Coexistence and interference protection is further enhanced by mechanisms in the existing MAC protocol including RTS/CTS, carrier sense and collision avoidance protocols, and MSDU fragmentation.

10. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 10 Motion Move to forward Draft 2.1 of IEEE 802.11g to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group and request that an IEEE 802.11g Working Group Letter Ballot be issued on the draft immediately following the close of the January 2002 session. Zyren/Gummadi Passed 44-0-1

11. doc.: IEEE 802.11-02/034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 11 Objectives for March 2002 Resolve letter ballot comments Issue a new letter ballot or a recirculation ballot Form a Sponsor Ballot pool for 802.11g