1. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 1 802-11 Proposed PAR Review March 2014 Date: 2014-03-21 Authors:

2. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 2 Abstract PARS under consideration: Mar 16 - 21, 2014, Beijing, China: 1.802.3bp - amendment: 1 Gb/s Operation over Single Twisted Pair Copper Cable, PAR modification request and unmodified CSD responses (grandfathered 5 Criteria responses)PAR modification requestunmodified CSD responses 2.802.3bs - amendment: 400 Gb/s Ethernet, PAR and CSDPARCSD 3.802.11 HEW (High Efficiency WLAN), PAR and CSD (not covered here)PARCSD 4.802.15.3d 100Gbps wireless switched point-to-point physical layer, PAR and CSDPARCSD 5.802.15.4r Radio based Distance Measurement Techniques, PAR and CSDPARCSD 6.802.22 Revision PAR for 802.22-2011, PAR and CSDPARCSD 7.802.1Qcd PAR modification

3. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 No comment from 802.11 1.802.3bp - amendment: 1 Gb/s Operation over Single Twisted Pair Copper Cable, PAR modification request and unmodified CSD responses (grandfathered 5 Criteria responses)PAR modification requestunmodified CSD responses 2.802.3bs - amendment: 400 Gb/s Ethernet, PAR and CSDPAR CSD Slide 3Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

4. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 4. 802.15.3d 100Gbps wireless switched point-to-point physical layer, PAR and CSDPARCSD 5.2.a and 5.2.b The scope is not bounded sufficiently. 5.2a and 5.2b Stakeholders will not be able to determine if this is a project if of interest with the scope as written. 5.2a and 5.2b It would seem that this project may overlap other projects. 5.2.b – The scope is not defined to a range that is definitive. Remove “or more” as a start, but the scope would need to be defined more crisply. 5.5 The last sentence is not true. (i.e. 802.11ad) 5.5 “guaranteed” is not possible when using unlicensed wireless bands. Slide 4Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

5. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3d PAR (cont) 5.1 Would you check the number that is actively involved? 100 seems high (only 20 people from 11 organizations attended the Study Group in January) 7.1 – There would seem to be some projects of similar scope – i.e. 802.15.3c, 802.11ad, Transferjet, etc. General Question – Is this the project that is getting the.1AC MAC address space correction? General: The CSD includes a suggested range of “up to several 100m” Slide 5Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

6. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3d CSD (cont)CSD 1.2.1 a) “guaranteed” – this is not possible – reword sentence. 1.2.1 a) The use cases seem too broad to be believable. 1.2.2 – Is 48-bit addressing required to be conformant with 802.1AC, if so, is this PAR proposing to use 48-bit addressing? 1.2.5 Is the proposed application consistent with modern data centers? Does this apply more to older deployed data centers for retro upgrade? If the data center is wired up, the change of configuration is typically done via software. So does this wireless technology provide a benefit given the wired connectivity? Slide 6Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

7. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 7 5. 802.15.4r Radio based Distance Measurement Techniques, PAR and CSDPARCSD 5.5 – expand RTLS the first instance it is used. CSD – 14.2.3 The first sentence does not parse well. Consider rewording This statement does not seem to indicate a distinct identity, but rather a change to the radio being used. “needs of IEEE 802.15.4” - the standard has not the “need” but rather the users of the standard. Could this statement simply be that you are adding ranging to your 802.15.4 radio?

8. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 8 6. 802.22 Revision PAR for 802.22-2011, PAR and CSD PARCSD General – This seems to be a word document that does not capture the correct PAR format. Please put into myProject and allow it to generate the proper output file to give the correct change bars and edit changes. 2.1 Title – dropping the TV from the “TV bands” leaves the title without bound of the frequencies being used. Suggest add “bands between 1300 MHz to 1750 MHz, 2700 MHz to 3700 MHz and 54 MHz to 862 MHz. “ to the title to ensure people know what this standard is covering. 7.1 802.11af should be lower-case.

9. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.22 Revision PAR (Cont) 8.1 the text there does not belong – it does not indicate which section it is giving extra explanation to. Delete all the text in 8.1 – consider adding to CSD or to section 5.5 Need for project. Use approved CSD form: CSD 1.2.2 – missing template or question…not from the approved template? CSD 1.2.4 missing template or question…not from the approved template? CSD 802.11af should be lowercase letters. Change all instances. CSD 1.2.4 last sentence does not parse correctly. Look at how this “802.22 (Wi-Far)” is described. Slide 9Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

10. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 7. 802.1Qcd Par Modification 5.2b – this section does not read correctly. The “Minor addition” seems like an editorial instruction or an informative word that should be removed. Are you changing the scope of the project as shown in both paragraphs in 5.2b? Is the scope change just the addition of the new text. It seems to be a summary for the scope of the project (potentially) or if it is the incremental addition to the scope, then just rewrite the scope of the project as such. 8.1 -- PAR modification form requires a statement of what and why (rationalization) the PAR is being changed be included in 8.1. Please add. Slide 10Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

11. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 RESPONSES TO FEEDBACK Comments were submitted for 4 PARs under consideration as noted: 1.802.3bp - No Comment 2.802.3bs - No Comment 3.802.11 HEW (not covered by this document) 4.802.15.3d 1 Comment submitted. 5.802.15.4r Comment submitted. 6.802.22 Revision - Comment submitted. 7.802.1Qcd PAR modification - Comment submitted March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 11

12. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.4r Comment Response file: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14- 0181-01-004r-response-to-comments-on-15-4r-par-and-csd.pptxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14- 0181-01-004r-response-to-comments-on-15-4r-par-and-csd.pptx PAR: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14-0075-05-004r-sg4r- draft-par.docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14-0075-05-004r-sg4r- draft-par.docx CSD: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14-0076-05-004r-sg4r- draft-csd.docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14-0076-05-004r-sg4r- draft-csd.docx March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 12

13. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Rolfe (BCA), Eggert (Atmel), et alSlide 13 5.5 – expand RTLS the first instance it is used. CSD – 14.2.3 The first sentence does not parse well. Consider rewording This statement does not seem to indicate a distinct identity, but rather a change to the radio being used. “needs of IEEE 802.15.4” - the standard has not the “need” but rather the users of the standard. Could this statement simply be that you are adding ranging to your 802.15.4 radio? 802.11 Comments on 802.15.4r PAR and CSD

14. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Rolfe (BCA), Eggert (Atmel), et alSlide 14 5.5 – expand RTLS the first instance it is used. Comment accepted The first occurrence of RTLS is replaced with “Real Time Locating System (RTLS)” 802.11 Comments on 802.15.4r PAR and CSD

15. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Rolfe (BCA), Eggert (Atmel), et alSlide 15 802.11 Comments on 802.15.4r PAR and CSD CSD – 14.2.3 The first sentence does not parse well. Consider rewording This statement does not seem to indicate a distinct identity, but rather a change to the radio being used. “needs of IEEE 802.15.4” - the standard has not the “need” but rather the users of the standard. Could this statement simply be that you are adding ranging to your 802.15.4 radio? Replace existing 14.2.3: Was: This amendment builds on the existing capabilities of IEEE 802.15.4 and extends the PHY and MAC enabling a wider set of interoperable radio based distance measurements techniques. No other IEEE 802 standard addresses the exchange of range information consistent with the needs of IEEE 802.15.4. NEW: This amendment addresses the ranging capabilities of IEEE STD 802.15.4. No other IEEE 802 standard provides all of the unique attributes of 802.15.4.

16. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3d PAR link: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/13/15-13- 0523-07-0thz-100g-working-draft-par.docxhttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/13/15-13- 0523-07-0thz-100g-working-draft-par.docx CSD link: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/13/15-13-0522-06- 0thz-100g-working-draft-5c.docx https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/13/15-13-0522-06- 0thz-100g-working-draft-5c.docx March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 16

17. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3d response – word doc March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 17

18. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3 new proposed scope Scope: This amendment defines a wireless switched point-to-point physical layer to IEEE Std. 802.15.3 operating at a PHY data rates typically in the range of 1 Gbps at the low end, and up to 100 Gbps at the high end with fallback to lower dates rates as needed. Operation is considered in bands from 60 GHz up to and including optical wireless at ranges as short as a few centimeters and up to several 100m. Additionally, modifications to the Medium Access Control (MAC) layer, needed to support this new physical layer, are defined. Slide 18Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

19. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.15.3 Need: In data centers wireless links will make frequent reconfiguration easier and more cost-effective. In the case of backhaul and fronthaul, wireless solutions will reduce costs for the case when installing a fiber network is not cost-effective. In the cases of close-proximity kiosk- downloading and intra-device communication, a minimum fallback data rate achievable with high probability, is required, which should be possible because of the operation in a controlled environment.. No wireless standard with all these properties, within the whole range of targeted data rates from 1 to operating at a primary data rate of 100 Gbps, with fallbacks to lower data rates as required and suitable for operation in a switched point-to-point-configuration exists today. Slide 19Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

20. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.22 REVISION PAR Comment file: IEEE 22-13/0168r1 The 802.22 WG Closing Motions Package is attached and can also be found at: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.22/dcn/14/22-14-0059-00-0000-802-22- march-plenary-ec-closing-motions.pptx the 802.22 Revision PAR Form as contained in Document 22-14-0057 Rev022-14-0057 Rev0 URLS: PARURLS: PAR and CSDCSD March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 20

21. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 21 6. 802.22 Revision PAR for 802.22-2011, PAR and CSD PARCSD Comment from the 802.11 Working Group: General – This seems to be a word document that does not capture the correct PAR format. Please put into myProject and allow it to generate the proper output file to give the correct change bars and edit changes. 802.22 Response: Accept. Although this PAR Form was generated using MyProject. But it reflects changes made as a result of the comments that have been received over last couple of months. However, if you wish to see the final PAR form which reflects the changes between the approved PAR (2006) and the proposed revision PAR, we can provide it.

22. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 22 6. 802.22 Revision PAR for 802.22-2011, PAR and CSD PARCSD Comment from the 802.11 Working Group: 2.1 Title – dropping the TV from the “TV bands” leaves the title without bound of the frequencies being used. Suggest add “bands between 1300 MHz to 1750 MHz, 2700 MHz to 3700 MHz and 54 MHz to 862 MHz. “ to the title to ensure people know what this standard is covering. 802.22 Response: 802.22 WG Rejects this comment. We believe that we have provided the frequency range in Section 5.2, the Scope. Also as required by the NESCOM convention, the Title is within the Scope. As such, this standard is going to be used in the Bands that Allow Spectrum Sharing in which Communications Devices may Opportunistically Operate in the Spectrum of a Primary Service. This bounds the scope for this project. Comment from the 802.11 Working Group: 7.1 802.11af should be lower-case. 802.22 Response: Accept.

23. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.22 Revision PAR (Cont) Comment from the 802.11 Working Group: 8.1 the text there does not belong – it does not indicate which section it is giving extra explanation to. Delete all the text in 8.1 – consider adding to CSD or to section 5.5 Need for project. 802.22 Response: Accept Slide 23Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

24. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.22 Revision PAR (Cont) Comment from the 802.11 Working Group: Use approved CSD form: CSD 1.2.2 – missing template or question…not from the approved template? CSD 1.2.4 missing template or question…not from the approved template? 802.22 Response: Comment Resolution - The Approved CSD Form was used. Just that the Questions were not repeated for Sections 1.2.2 and 1.2.4. The questions have been included in the revision (Link) for your reference.Link CSD 802.11af should be lowercase letters. Change all instances. 802.22 Response: Accept CSD 1.2.4 last sentence does not parse correctly. Look at how this “802.22 (Wi-Far)” is described. 802.22 Response: Sentence modified to read “Industry consortia such as the WhiteSpace Alliance are working on 802.22 (Wi-FAR™) inter-operability, compliance, testing and certification procedures.” Slide 24Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

25. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 802.1Qcd March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 25

26. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 Response to the 802.11 comments from 802.1: Comment: 5.2b – this section does not read correctly. The “Minor addition” seems like an instruction or an informative word that should be removed.· Response: You are correct – it should have been written as a complete sentence. Add to the scope: This standard also specifies minor extensions and editorial corrections to the Application Priority TLV. Slide 26Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014

27. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 Comment: Are you changing the scope of the project as shown in both paragraphs in 5.2b? Is the scope change just the addition of the new text. It seems to be a summary for the scope of the project (potentially) or if it is the incremental addition to the scope, then just rewrite the scope of the project as such. Response: Yes we are changing the scope of the project. They changed the way the system generates a PAR modification. It used to show the old text on the left and the new text on the right with the changes highlighted. Now it shows the new scope in plain text on the left and change marked on the right so the contents of both boxes is the same. Slide 27Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014 Response to the 802.11 comments from 802.1:

28. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1 Comment: 8.1 -- PAR modification form requires a statement of what and why (rationalization) the PAR is being changed be included in 8.1. Please add. Response: Thank you for pointing that out since the small text below the 8.1 box was missed in editing the PAR form. Add to 8.1: 5.2b The PAR scope is being changed to include adding a value for the Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) to the SEL field values table of the Application Priority VLAN TLV and making minor editorial changes to that TLV for better consistency. The updated form is at: http://ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2014/cd-thaler-Qcd-PAR-mod-0314-v02.pdf Slide 28Jon Rosdahl, CSR March 2014 Response to the 802.11 comments from 802.1:

29. Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0319r1March 2014 Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 29 References PARS under consideration are listed here: http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/PARs.shtml