1. 802.11m Report September 2003 Month 1998 doc.: IEEE 802.11-98/xxx
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.
John Doe, His Company

2. Goals for September 2003 Interpretation requests Other inputs
Draft responses to requests and forward to WG
Other inputs
Review
Develop updates to standard
Volunteers needed
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

3. Submissions? Are there any submissions?
September 2003
Submissions?
Are there any submissions?
Terry Cole: 199r1 – WG Editor’s potential errata list
Andrew Myles: 382r7 –Annoying things
Adrian Stephens: 667r0 – MA-Unitdata.request
Are there any new interpretation requests?
Contention Window and Retry Counters
Country Information Element
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

4. Proposed Agenda Review IEEE Patent Policy
September 2003
Proposed Agenda
Review IEEE Patent Policy
Review interpretation request procedure
New business
Review interpretation requests received
Draft responses to interpretation requests
Forward to full WG
Review other inputs
Develop work plan to update standard for interpretation requests and other inputs
Begin work on updates to standards
Adjourn
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

5. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Month 1998
doc.: IEEE /xxx
September 2003
IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
6. Patents
IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including 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.
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.
John Doe, His Company

6. Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
Month 1998
doc.: IEEE /xxx
September 2003
Inappropriate Topics for IEEE WG Meetings
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 Patent Committee Administrator at
Approved by IEEE-SA Standards Board – December 2002
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.
John Doe, His Company

7. Interpretation Procedure
September 2003
Interpretation Procedure
Send to Linda Gargiulo
IEEE forwards requests to the WG
WG responds
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

8. Work Items Interpretation requests
September 2003
Interpretation requests
Contention Window and Retry Counters
Country Information Element
Request from Adrian Stephens: MA-UNITDATA.request
Andrew’s accumulated list 382r7 – Problems with the MAC standard and a PHY standard (mostly)
Documents from Jon Rosdahl
r2-W-Errata list Justifies need for Corrigenda for
r0-W-Errata-list-for d-needs-corrigendum
r0-W-Scanning-process-requires-parameter-block-for a
r0-W-Errata-List-for a-needs-corrigendum
Document supplied by Terry Cole (other inputs)
W-Potential-WG-Editor-Errata
802.11F Association primitives
Update informative text on regulatory information for a and b, provide table for d (collect in an appendix?)
IBSS coalescence
PCF
Optional/mandatory match between text and PICS
SDL (remove, improve, abstract), MSCs?
Terry received during 2003 edition process
Recommendation of phase-in for compliance
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

9. Interpretation Requests
September 2003
Interpretation Requests
Contention Window and Retry Counters
Country Information Element
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

10. Interpretation Request
September 2003
Interpretation Request
The CW is 'controlled' by the Station counters, increasing in size every time either of the Station counters increases. It is reset to CWmin only
after a successful MSDU transmission, or
when either of the Station counters reaches their respective limit.
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

11. Interpretation Request (cont.)
September 2003
Interpretation Request (cont.)
Consider a scenario where a station *continually* fails to transmit successfully:
The CW will increase, until condition b) above is met, at which point it will revert to CWmin.
However, the Station retry counters are not reset at this point, and will continue to increase;
condition b) will not be met again, and
CW will increase (or remain at CWmax) for all subsequent (failed) attempts, regardless of the state of the respective MSDU counters.
Is this the intended behavior? It seems odd that the CW will be reset after the first failure (when b) is met, and the MSDU is discarded), but not for subsequent MSDUs.
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

12. Interpretation Response
September 2003
Interpretation Response
The standard is unambiguous and describes the intended behavior.
It is intended that a station that is unable to successfully communicate with its intended receiver(s) will select its backoff value for all frames transmitted from a window with an upper bound of CWmax
after an initial reset to CWmin
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

13. September 2003
Motion to adopt
Moved: That document r0 be adopted as the response to the interpretation request regarding contention window and retry counter operation.
Moved: Darwin Engwer
Seconded: Al Petrick
Vote: Unanimous
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

14. September 2003
Motion to forward to WG
Motion: to request the working group to accept and forward the interpretation response contained in document r0 to Linda Gargiulo at the IEEE office as the official response of the working group.
Moved: Al Petrick
Seconded: Darwin Engwer
Vote: Unanimous
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

15. Interpretation Request
September 2003
Interpretation Request
The phrase “…maximum power…allowed to be transmitted” in the Country information element is ambiguous. The most likely interpretations include:
TPO (Transmitter Power Output)
EIRP (Effective Isotropically Radiated Power)
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

16. Interpretation Response
September 2003
Interpretation Response
The standard does not specify a measurement method for the value of Maximum Transmit Power Level
The value is to be interpreted according to the country indicated in the Country String
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

17. Interpretation Request (cont.)
September 2003
Interpretation Request (cont.)
Apart from a limit on radiated power, the regulations usually contain a PSD (Power Spectral Density) limit. In some domains, the PSD limit is more strict than the TPO/EIRP limit and thus further limits the transmitted power.
How is the value in the information element to be interpreted?
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

18. Interpretation Response (cont.)
September 2003
Interpretation Response (cont.)
The standard does not provide this information.
It is up to the implementer to determine the correct transmit power level for their implementation from the information provided in the information element.
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

19. Interpretation Request (cont.)
September 2003
Interpretation Request (cont.)
The Country Information Element does not indicate whether a particular subband has indoor/outdoor restrictions. How should this information be derived?
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

20. Interpretation Response (cont.)
September 2003
Interpretation Response (cont.)
The standard does not allow the mixing of indoor and outdoor band descriptions in the same information element.
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

21. September 2003
Motion to adopt
Moved: That document r0 be adopted as the response to the interpretation request regarding contention window and retry counter operation.
Moved: Darwin Engwer
Seconded: Al Petrick
Vote: Unanimous
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

22. September 2003
Motion to forward to WG
Motion: to request the working group to accept and forward the interpretation response contained in document r0 to Linda Gargiulo at the IEEE office as the official response of the working group.
Moved: Al Petrick
Seconded: Darwin Engwer
Vote: Unanimous
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

23. Review other inputs Completed review of all input documents
September 2003
Review other inputs
Completed review of all input documents
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

24. Output Documents 710r0: This report
September 2003
Output Documents
710r0: This report
752r0: Interpretation Response 1-09/03
754r0: Interpretation Response 2-09/03
619r1: Status of Work Items
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.

25. Adjourn Time for adjournment reached Meeting adjourned at 9:30pm
September 2003
Adjourn
Time for adjournment reached
Meeting adjourned at 9:30pm
Bob O'Hara, Airespace, Inc.