1. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 September 2008
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: [SG-NAN Standards Process Scenarios for Wireless NAN]
Date Submitted: [09/09/2008]
Source: [Jay Ramasastry] Company [Silver Spring Networks]
Address [575 Broadway, Redwood City, CA 94063] Voice:[ ]
Re: [SG-NAN PAR and 5C Development]
Abstract: Launch a discussion on available options for determining project scope and content for the proposed NAN standards activity.
Purpose: Stimulate discussion in the Study Group towards development of a suitable PAR and 5C for a Wireless NAN standard under
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P 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 P
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

2. Standards Process Scenarios for Wireless NAN
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 September 2008
Standards Process Scenarios for Wireless NAN
WNAN
HAN
Meters
ACCESS POINT
ACCESS POINT
WAN
HAN
Meters
Meters
HAN
A Discussion Document
SG-NAN Hawaii, 2008
Jay Ramasastry
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

3. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Purpose and Goals
Stimulate Discussion
Assist SG to frame the PAR optimally
Make best use of work done by other TGs
Assist WNAN activity to make quick progress
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

4. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Interest
Group
Concept
Opportunity
Study
WG Motion
EC Approval
Establish the Need
Recommendation to WG
Task 5 C
PAR :
Identify the Problem
Define Scope of Action
Justify Standard Action ( )
Request Task Group
New WG WG
Balloting
Draft
Standard
Develop Draft Standard
Proposals
Selection
Technical Completion
Refinement
802
Coments
Refined
Draft Standard
Comments
Publication
Task Group may be an
amendment to existing . 15
Standard or a
New standard within
EC may decide a
new WG is called for
Process in a Nutshell
We are here !!
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

5. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Hawaii Meeting
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

6. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
FUTURE WNAN STANDARD
802.15
PAR to address
the liaison
WNAN
Standard
Standard
PHY
Specifications
MAC
Specifications
TG4e
MAC
Amendment
Current activity
under approved PAR
Based on WNAN Application
Requirements
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

7. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Range of Options
Amendment to ( m)
New PHY Amendment (Options: NBFHSS, DSSS)
MAC enhancements related to PHY
Leveraging of work done under 15.4 TGs
Revisions to ( n)
New PHY (Options: NBFHSS, DSSS)
Revisions to TG4e MAC being developed to add WNAN MAC requirements
New Standard under ( X)
New MAC per WNAN requirements
New WG for NAN (Not a desirable option)
Obviously new everything
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

8. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Pros/Cons of Options - 1
Amendment to ( m)
Most expedient (maybe)
Leverages existing 15.4 inertia and synergies (ZigBee, ISA100)
Adds new PHY and related MAC features
Most constrained approach
May not be technically ideal solution
May impose marketplace constraints
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

9. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Pros/Cons of Options - 2
Revisions to
May not be expedient
Leverages necessary aspects of the and its MAC amendments
Adds a new PHY
May be less constrained approach
Not result in everyone’s technically ideal solution
May impose marketplace constraints
Revision would have a lot of resistance in WG. Not really necessary – we can do almost anything as a new requirement tied to the new PHY.
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

10. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Pro/Con of Options - 3
New standard in ( X)
More flexible technical approach (more options)
Could result in technically more ideal solution
No “backward compatibility” conflicts
Avoids bloating
May take longer but manageable W
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

11. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Pro/Con of Options - 4
New WG for NAN (802.yy)
Obviously new everything, most flexibility
Can’t leverage current work done under groups
May take much longer
May be hard for chipmakers of solutions to participate and integrate WNAN solutions
Up to EC to decide
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>

12. doc.: IEEE 802.15-<doc#>
<month year>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
8 Sept 2008
Desirable Option
Write the PAR Scope and Requirements for a x or y Standard (amendment or new)
Ask for creation of a TG to work on WNAN standard (TG 4f?)
This TG will develop the WNAN PHY options, and MAC/PHY interface requirements
This TG will coordinate with TG4e to develop a plan for the WNAN MAC (for amendment issues)
Coordination with and involvement of TG4e assures maximum leveraging of MAC work already accomplished
WNAN standard (whether new x or y) will clearly address WNAN requirements and implementation
Avoid bloating the standard with obsolete or non-relevant specifications
Jay Ramasastry
<author>, <company>