1. IEEE 802.11 TGaf DRAFT Meeting Plan and Agenda
April 2009
doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0
July 2010
IEEE TGaf DRAFT Meeting Plan and Agenda
Date:
Authors:
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

2. April 2009
doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0
July 2010
Abstract
This presentation is the agenda and meeting plan for the meeting of IEEE TGaf taking place the week of July 11, 2010 at the IEEE 802 Plenary in San Diego, CA
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

3. July 2010
Plan for the Week
Overview of the Technical Review and comment spreadsheet
Joint session with and (Tuesday PM3)
Comment resolution
Direct the Editor to create new draft
Plan for September and teleconferences
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

4. Tuesday AM2 Agenda Meeting call to order
July 2010
Tuesday AM2 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Administrative items including IEEE IP statement
Modify and approve the agenda
Approve meeting and teleconference minutes
Vote to approve Draft d0.03
Approve comment spreadsheet in 10-11/595r8
Vote on submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Review TVWS regulatory requirement basics
Review Internal Review comments
Begin comment resolution
Recess
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

5. July 2010
Administrative Items
Please be familiar with the documents at the following links:
IEEE Patent Policy -
Patent FAQ -
LoA Form -
Affiliation FAQ -
Anti-Trust FAQ -
Ethics -
IEEE Working Group Policies and Procedures -
 Chair , Vice-chair and Secretary
Chair: Rich Kennedy (Research In Motion)
Vice-chair: Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems)
Recording Secretary: Zhou Lan (NICT)
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

6. Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
July 2010
All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants:
“Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents
“Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims
“Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)
The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group
Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged
No duty to perform a patent search
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

7. Patent Related Links
July 2010
All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.
Patent Policy is stated in these sources:
IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
Material about the patent policy is available at
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit
This slide set is available at
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

8. Call for Potentially Essential Patents
July 2010
If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance:
Either speak up now or
Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or
Cause an LOA to be submitted
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

9. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings
July 2010
All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws.
Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims.
Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions.
Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings.
Technical considerations remain primary focus
Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets.
Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation.
Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed … do formally object.
See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details.
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

10. March 2010
doc.: IEEE /0265r1
July 2010
Meeting Etiquette
IEEE 802 is a world-wide professional technical organization
Meetings are to be conducted in an orderly and professional manner in accordance with the policies and procedures governed by the organization.
Individuals are to address the “Technical” content of the subject under consideration and refrain from making “personal” comments to or about the presenter.
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Stephen McCann, RIM

11. July 2010
Introduction
WELCOME to the third face-to-face meeting of IEEE TGaf!
On Friday, November 20, 2009 the IEEE TGaf was approved by the EC (10/1/4) with this motion:
Believing that the PAR and Five Criteria contained in the document referenced below meet IEEE-SA guidelines,
Move to forward the TVWS PAR information from 11-09/934r8 to NesCom.
On December 8th NesCom approved the formation of the Task Group for P802.11af
We have just completed an Internal Review and have many comments to review and resolve
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

12. July 2010
PAR Scope and Purpose
Approved PAR Scope: An amendment that defines modifications to both the physical layers (PHY) and the Medium Access Control Layer (MAC), to meet the legal requirements for channel access and coexistence in the TV White Space
Approved PAR Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to allow wireless networks to be used in the TV white space
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

13. July 2010
Purpose, Principles and Vision/Outcome “If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.”*
cbp-and-david-allens-methods
Purpose: the Task Group should create an amendment whose implementation in solutions is likely to receive FCC approval for operation in the TV White Spaces under the 47 CFR Part 15 subpart H rules.
Principles:
If the FCC changes the rules, the Task Group should change the amendment accordingly
The amendment should not duplicate functionality that is being standardized in other Task Groups that are likely to complete before af.
There is no need for backwards compatibility with 2.45 GHz ISM operation.
The starting point is changes to Clauses 17 and 20 and Annexes I and J
Vision/Outcome: Use the OFDM PHYs with 5-, 10- and 20-MHz channel widths to specify the basis for a system that the regulators can approve for operation in the TVWS bands.
* Yogi Berra
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

14. Motion #1 Approve Meeting & Teleconference Minutes Motion: Moved by:
July 2010
Motion #1
Approve Meeting & Teleconference Minutes
May Meeting in Beijing
af-meeting-minutes-for-Beijing-2010 (posted 5/28)
June 8th, June 22nd and July 6th teleconferences
af-June-8th-teleconference-minutes (posted 6/15)
af-june-22th-teleconference-minutes (posted 7/6)
af-july-6th-teleconference-minutes (posted 7/8)
Motion:
To approve the TGaf minutes from the May Wireless Interim in Beijing and the June 8th, June 22nd and July 6th teleconferences in documents 11-10/680r0, 11-10/701r0, 11-10/746r1 and 11-10/757r0 respectively
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion? None heard
Vote: Approved by unanimous consent
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

15. Motion #2 Approve Draft d0.03
July 2010
Motion #2
Approve Draft d0.03
Draft d0.03 is the approved d0.02 with changes required because TGaf will complete after TGmb
Draft d0.03 will be that starting point for the incorporation of comment resolutions this week
Motion: To approve P802.11af draft d0.03 as the base for the P802.11af amendment
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion? None heard
Vote: Approved by unanimous consent
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

16. July 2010
Motion #3
Move: To accept 11-10/595r8 as the comment spreadsheet for d0.03
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion? None heard
Vote: Approved by unanimous consent
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

17. Motion #4 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #4
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/695r2 to resolve spreadsheet (11-10/595r8) comment 148.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

18. Motion #5 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #5
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/731r0 to resolve spreadsheet (11-10/595r8) comments 4,5, 35 and 64.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

19. Motion #6 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #6
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/739r0 to resolve spreadsheet (11-10/595r8) comments 4,5, 35 and 64.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

20. Motion #7 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #7
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/737r0 to resolve spreadsheet (11-10/595r8) comments 4, 5, 6, 23, 68, 75 and 82.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

21. Motion #8 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #8
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/709r0 and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

22. Motion #9 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #9
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/710r0 and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

23. Motion #10 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #10
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/xxxry and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

24. Motion #11 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #11
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/xxxry and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

25. Motion #12 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #12
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/xxxry and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

26. Motion #13 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #13
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/xxxry and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

27. Motion #14 Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
July 2010
Motion #14
Approval of submissions reviewed on teleconferences
Move to approve 11-10/xxxry and ask the Editor to incorporate it into draft d0.04.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Discussion on the motion?
Vote: x YES, y NO, z ABSTAIN
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

28. TV Bands Regulatory Requirements
July 2010
TV Bands Regulatory Requirements
These [FCC] rules are primarily intended to ensure the efficient sharing of the TV Bands while protecting incumbent users
The FCC has enabled this band for TVBDs if and only if the licensed users’ interests are protected
We must not interfere
Mitigation of any interference issue should not increase the enforcement requirements for the Commission
There are no formal changes in regulatory status since Beijing
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

29. Our Selected Terminology
July 2010
Our Selected Terminology
We voted to standardize on “TV White Space”
From the Los Angeles minutes:
6.2. Straw poll: “Which of the following terms is preferred as the expansion of TVWS: TV White Space, TV White Spaces, TV Whitespaces, and TV Band White Space.”
Results:
• TV White Space: 17
• TV White Spaces: 3
• TV Whitespaces: 0
• TV Band White Space: 0
Most of the rest of the industry and regulators use “TV White Spaces”
Should we re-choose our term to agree with everyone else?
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

30. Some Regulator Definitions
July 2010
Some Regulator Definitions
FCC: “…rules to allow unlicensed radio transmitters to operate in the broadcast television spectrum at locations where that spectrum is not being used by licensed services (this unused TV spectrum is often termed “white spaces”)”.
ITU-R: “A label indicating a part of the spectrum, which is available for a radiocommunication application (service, system) at a given time in a given geographical area on a non-interfering / non-protected basis with regard to other services with a higher priority on a national basis.”
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

31. The Internal Review Started May 6th
July 2010
The Internal Review
Started May 6th
Closed May 16th (Midnight EDT – Noon May 17th here)
16 Responders
150 Comments received
Resolutions discussed and submissions received on teleconferences
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

32. Comment Spreadsheet Review
July 2010
Comment Spreadsheet Review
11-10/595r8 Comment Resolution Spreadsheet
adds D0.02 submission column (Q) to assist in proposed comment resolutions per July 6th teleconference discussion
Column Q lists the source of text being commented on
Column P is empty, to work on proposed resolutions
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

33. July 2010
Comment Resolution
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

34. Tuesday PM3 Joint Session Agenda
July 2010
Tuesday PM3 Joint Session Agenda
Meeting call to order
Administrative items including IEEE IP statement
Modify and approve the agenda
TGaf Chair Election
Review TGaf status and progress
Review status and progress
4 presentations
Introduction and status
System design document
July Tutorial
July Workshop
Review status and progress
Recess
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

35. Wednesday PM2 and 3 Agenda
July 2010
Wednesday PM2 and 3 Agenda
Meeting call to order
Modify and approve the agenda
Administrative items
Reminder and Call for essential patents
Review and resolve comments
Direct the Editor to create new draft
Adjourn
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

36. TGaf Timeline – Updated July 2010
January 2010
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0
July 2010
TGaf Timeline – Updated July 2010
Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: September 2010
Re-circulation Working Group Letter Ballot: November 2010
Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: January 2011
Initial Sponsor Ballot: March 2011
Approved Sponsor Ballot: May 2011
Final WG/EC Approval: November 2011
RevCom/Standards Board Approval: December 2011
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Michael Montemurro, RIM

37. Teleconferences July 20 August 3, 17 and 31 September 28
October 12 and 26
November 2 and16 
Time: 22:00 ET for 90 minutes
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

38. Planning for September
July 2010
Planning for September
Continue resolving comments from the Technical Review
Revise Draft 0.04(?)
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

39. July 2010
Any Other Business
None
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

40. Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
May 2007
doc.: IEEE /0679r2
July 2010
Process of Getting to Letter Ballot and Beyond
Completed Steps | Future Steps
Adoption of PAR and 5 Criteria
Technical Presentations and Discussions
Specify Any Additional Requirements, Comparison Criteria, or Other Documents
Call For Proposals
Presentation of Proposals
Select from Submitted Complete Proposals to Produce a Draft
Refine Draft
Letter Ballot – September 2010
Recirculation – November 2010
Sponsor Ballot – January 2010
Recirculation -
Final WG/EC Approval – June 2011
IEEE SB REVCOM Approval – July 2011
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion
Peter Ecclesine, Cisco Systems

41. 3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
July 2010
3 Cycles of Comments and Resolution
Call for Informal Comments
Comment Resolution
WG Letter Ballot
Comment Resolution, Recirculation
Sponsor Ballot
Comment Resolution, Recirculation
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

42. References July 2010 11-09-0749-03-0000-802.11-in-the-tvws
IEEE Std IEEE Standard for Information Technology— Telecommunications and information exchange between systems— Local and metropolitan area networks— Specific requirements Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications
FCC Second Report and Order and Memorandum and Order (
tvws-par-nescom-form-plus-5c
cbp-and-david-allens-methods
af-meeting-plan-and-agenda-los-angeles-2010
m-lb160-cid-2113-proposed-resolution
af-draft-call-for-proposals
af-feb teleconferenc-plan
af-feb-16-telecon-minutes
af-petere-amendment-proposal
af-amendment-proposal-for-measurement-report
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

43. July 2010
References [2]
af-modification-on-dfs-and-dcf-procedure-adapting-to-fcc-rules-in-tvws-part-2-hidden-node
af-modification-on-dfs-and-dcf-procedure-adapting-to-fcc-rules-in-tvws-part-1-synchronized-quiet
af-regulatory-operating-classes-specifications
af-mac-and-phy-proposal-for af
af-radio-resource-measurement-type-and-procedure-for-tvws-application-under-fcc-rules
af-enabling-procedure-of-communication-in-tvws-under-fcc-rules
af-requirements-and-amendments-regarding-tvws-database-access
af-amendment-proposal-for-tv-white-spaces-operation
af-mar teleconferenc-plan
af-summary-of-nict-fs-technical-proposals-for-tgaf
af-march-9-teleconference-minutes
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

44. July 2010
References [3]
af-meeting-plan-and-agenda-orlando-2010
af-closing-report-orlando-2010
af-meeting-minutes-for-Orlando-2010
af-text-document-for-proposal
af-text-document-for-proposal
af-text-for-regulatory-operating-classes-specifications-proposal
af-mar teleconferenc-plan-and-agenda
af-march-30-teleconference-minutes
af-apr-13-teleconference-plan-and-agenda
af-normative-text-for-scanning-in-tv-whitespaces
af-april-13-teleconference-minutes
af-apr-27-teleconferenc-plan-and-agenda
af-global-operating-channels
af-relocating-3650mhz-enabling-signal
af-april-27th-teleconference-minutes
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion

45. References [4] 11-10-0575-00-00af-May-11th-teleconference-minutes
July 2010
References [4]
af-May-11th-teleconference-minutes
af-meeting-plan-and-agenda-beijing-2010 (this document)
af-d0-02-comment-spreadsheet
Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion