1. TGn Opening Report Orlando , Fl, US March 2004
Bruce Kraemer, Chair
Garth Hillman, Secretary
March 15, 2004
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

2. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Month 2002
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
March 2004
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – December 2002
6. Patents
IEEE standards may include the known use of essential patents and patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard. This assurance shall be provided without coercion and prior to approval of the standard (or reaffirmation when a patent becomes known after initial approval of the standard). This assurance shall be a letter that is in the form of either:
a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the patentee will not enforce any of its present or future patent(s) whose use would be required to implement the proposed IEEE standard against any person or entity using the patent(s) to comply with the standard or
b) A statement that a license will be made available without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination
This assurance shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal and is irrevocable during that period.
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD
John Doe, His Company

3. Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
March 2004
Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – March 2003
Don’t discuss licensing terms or conditions
Don’t discuss product pricing, territorial restrictions or market share
Don’t discuss ongoing litigation or threatened litigation
Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed… do formally object.
If you have questions,
contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

4. March 2004
January Session Close
There were 24 submissions presented during the January session ( listing in r3)
Minutes for the session were in r0
Since the close of the session there have been 73 submissions (40 unique document numbers)
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

5. Interim Activities The FRCC held 3 calls.
Month 2002
doc.: IEEE /xxxr0
March 2004
Interim Activities
The FRCC held 3 calls.
TGn simulation methodology ad-hoc sub-committee held 3 conference calls.
Reports to TGn and ongoing discussions will occur on Monday thru Wednesday.
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD
John Doe, His Company

6. Objectives for March 2004 Complete Selection Procedure (11-03-665r9)
Adopt Updated Usage Models
Adopt Functional Requirements
Adopt Comparison Criteria
Resolve Simulation Methodology
Receive relevant presentations
Issue a Call for Proposals/Review Timeline
Receive Technical Presentations
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

7. March 2004
Agenda Logic (1)
Monday afternoon will be devoted to placing all documents and upcoming decision topics in front of the group. There will not be adequate time to resolve each issue in session on Monday as it would be very time consuming to listen to every comment, objection, change suggestion.
Hence, the plan will be to ask that comments on the FRCC be submitted to Adrian at least by 09:00 am on Tuesday morning using bona fide submissions with document numbers. A form for this purpose has been prepared ( ).
6 FRCC presentations have been noted prior to session start. Additional FRCC presentations may be submitted. Those pertaining to FRCC would need to be heard Tuesday morning.
Adrian then needs time present the summary of comments on FRCC and drive to resolution . This would occupy the bulk of time on Tuesday until 6 pm and perhaps Wednesday.
Jeff will need to convene a single-topic simulation methodology session during Monday evening where prepared presentations would be heard. Discussion in front of the whole of 11n would be more productive than in sub-committee. Point presentations on the simulation ad-hoc will be held on Monday evening. Straw polls may be used to assess the degree of consensus. Voting will be expected Tuesday evening.
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

8. March 2004
Agenda Logic (2)
The call for proposals letter needs to be reviewed and approved. Completion of the wording should not be difficult EXCEPT for the specification of the time line. Hence, the time line also needs to be reviewed and critical dates and dependencies worked out. These two topics need to be coupled together in one session for the sake of continuity. An optimistic (but feasible) goal would be one hour to discuss both.
Time remaining on Thursday would be used to complete voting on any topic not resolved by Wednesday and hear any technical presentations. TGn session time ends at 3:30 pm.
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

9. Agenda Logic (3) Voting sequence
March 2004
Agenda Logic (3)
Voting sequence
Simulation ad-hoc - presentations & straw polls Monday - final discussion and formal voting Tuesday evening 7:30pm-9:30pm slot
if needed expand into Wednesday am 8-10 am
FR – CC - Usage Models comments review begin Tuesday at 10:30am - 6:00
Tuesday Vote on 1:30pm then continue with CC discussions to 6pm
CC discussion continues through Wed 1:30 pm – 6:00PM with presentations on subject under discussion
CC voting Wednesday afternoon
Discuss Usage models on Thursday 8 am - vote in first session if possible
Then call for proposals and time line 10:30- 11:30
Thursday - any remaining technical presentations between 11:30 and 3:30 end of session– unless we find a need for sub-committee break-out time earlier in the day which will allow presentations earlier.
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

10. March 2004
Mon & Tues
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

11. March 2004
Wed & Thurs
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

12. New Documents as of Sunday March 14
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

13. Key Documents Key TGn Documents as of March ’04 Opening
TGn Schedule r0
TGn Selection Procedure r9
Selection Procedure Minutes r2
Channel Models r2
Usage Models r r13
Functional Requirements r9
FRCC Cumulative Minutes r6 r10
Comparison Criteria r r17
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

14. FRCC Presentations - March
FRCC Report and Process for TGn Meeting Adrian Stephens
FRCC Template for Comments Adrian Stephens
FRCC Items
PHY Abstraction based on PER Prediction John Ketchum
Carrier Frequency/Symbol Clock Offset Proposal for TGn FRCC Colin Lanzl r2
Simple Model for Phase Noise Impairment for TGn CC Colin Lanzl r0
TGN FRCC Proposed new IM Colin Lanzl r0
TGN FRCC Proposed new IM7: Antenna Configuration Colin Lanzl r0
Simulation Methodology
Problems including adaptation in PHY simulation black box Adrian Stephens 04-
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

15. Technical Presentations - March
MIMO Ant OFDM Solutions for Enhanced PHY Alexandre Dias r0
Turbo Codes for IEEE n Marie-Helene Hamon r0
20ms Effective Preamble MIMO OFDM Seigo Nakao r1
PCCC Turbo Codes for802.11n Bart Van Poucke r0
Number of MIMO Multiplex for 11n Standards Yusuke Asai r0
Field Measurements of 2 by 2 MIMO Comm Dabak Daneshad r0
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD

16. March 2004
End
Opening Report
Kraemer, Conexant; Hillman, AMD