doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide Jan 2010 Closing Plenary Reports Date: Authors: doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 2 Abstract This document is a digest of the closing reports of all sub-groups for presentation at the January 2010 closing plenary meeting. doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide WG Editors Meeting (Jan 10) Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 4 Abstract This document contains agenda/minutes/actions/status as prepared/recorded at the IEEE Editors Meeting from slide 2 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 5 Agenda for Roll Call / Contacts / Reflector Go round table and get brief status report Review action items from previous meeting Numbering Alignment process Amendment Ordering / ANA Status / Draft Snapshots Lessons learned from TGw/TGn RevCom Lessons learned from editing of TGn Style Guide for ISO JTC1 review of Sponsor Ballot Drafts from slide 3 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 6 Roll Call Editors Present P802.11mb Amendment (REVmb) Adrian Stephens P802.11p Amendment (WAVE) Wayne Fisher P802.11s Amendment (MESH) Kazuyuki Sakoda (temporary) P802.11v Amendment (WNM) Emily Qi Also present: Bill Marshall Clint Chaplin Vijay Auluck Editors Not Present P802.11u Amendment (IW) -- Necati Canpolat P802.11z Amendment (TDLS) Menzo Wentink P802.11aa Amendment (VTS) Hang Liu IEEE Staff not present and always welcome! Kim Breitfelder manager publishing, Michael Kipness our staff liaison, Note: editors request that an IEEE staff member should be present at least during Plenary meetings Michelle Turner staff editor for 802, from slide 4 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 7 Volunteer Editor Contacts TGp Wayne Fisher TGs Temporary: Kazuyuki Sakoda - TGu Necati Canpolat TGv Emily Qi TGz Menzo Wentink TGmb Adrian Stephens TGaa Hang Liu Editor Emeritus: TGk Joe Kwak TGn Adrian Stephens TGr Bill Marshall TGw Nancy Cam-Winget TGy Peter Ecclesine from slide 5 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 8 Round table status report REVmb in LB160 resolution, have rolled in 11w, 11n this year 11p Initial Sponsor Ballot comment resolution 11s LB159 comment resolution 11z Initial Sponsor Ballot comment resolution, probably recirc after Los Angeles 11aa D0.03 in internal review from slide 6 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 9 Reflector Updates Each editor is expected to be on the reflector and current. If you didnt receive the meeting notice from the reflector, please sendto To be updated: None from slide 7 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 10 IEEE Publication Status IEEE published and for free download with Get802 Published in June 2007 Combines all existing amendments and includes maintenance work by TGma Publications completed for k, r and y, n and w 11k now available with Get802 11r now available with Get802 11y now available with Get802 from slide 8 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 11 MEC Status P802.11p D7.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in June 2009 See p-P802-11p D7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc P802.11u D6.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See u-P802-11u D7 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc P802.11v D6.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See u-P802-11v D6 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc P802.11z D5.0 has gone through Mandatory Editorial Coordination in July 2009 See u-P802-11z D5 Mandatory Editorial Coordination MEC.doc from slide 9 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 12 Numbering Alignment Process Update from all published standards. Posted as /644r11 By Adrian Stephens TGz will start a new update cycle. Slide 12 from slide 10 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 13 Amendment & other ordering notes Editors define publication order independent of working group public timelines: Since official timeline is volatile and moves around Publication order helps provide stability in amendment numbering, figures, clauses and other numbering assignments Editors are committed to maintain a rational publication order Numbering spreadsheet 08/0644: Succeeding amendments to do their respective updates Must match the official timeline after plenaries from slide 11 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 14 ANA Announcements Current ANA announced to group is r8. (8/6/2009) See https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/file/08/ ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/file/08/ ana-database-assigned-numbers.xls All new requests received by end of meeting will be uploaded and announced via WG reflector Procedure for ANA is contained in 07/0827r0. See Editorial Guidance ANA assignments should be done before the time of moving from WG LB to Sponsor ballot. If a resource number is not in the ANA Database, please use in drafts! Editors to replace any ANA controlled resources numbers with upon incorporation of material into drafts. from slide 12 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 15 Amendment Ordering Amendment NumberTask GroupREVCOM Date Amendment 6TGzJuly 2010 was Jan Amendment 7TGpNov Amendment 8TGvJune Amendment 9TGuJun 2010 was Sept Amendment 10TGsJan Revision802.11mbJune Amendment 1TGaaOct Amendment 2TGacDec Amendment 3TGadDec 2012 Data as of Jan 2010 SeeAmendment numbering is editorial! No need to make ballot comments on these dynamic numbers! from slide 13 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 16Your Draft Status Updates Each editor, please send update for next page via the editors reflector no later than Thursday am2 to update table on next page! from slide 14 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 17 Most current doc shaded green. TGTG Published or Draft Baseline Documents SourceMEC Style GuideEditor Snapshot Date krywnzpvusmbaa z WordYes2007Menzo Wentink 17-July p Frame 7.2Yes2009Wayne Fisher19-Jan v Frame 7.2No2007Emily Qi18-Nov u Frame 7.2Yes2007Necati Canpolat 18-Nov s Frame 8.0No2007Kazuyuki Sakoda, pro- tem 20-Jan mbmb 2007 Inc 2008 Inc 2009 Inc Frame 7.2No2009Adrian Stephens 18-Jan aa NoHang Liu18-Nov Changes from last report shown in red. Jan 2010 Draft Development Snapshot Slide 17 from slide 15 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 18 Lessons Learned from RevCom During Sponsor ballot (see 09/1058r1) Minimise cross references (disagree see CID 1234) Because not all CIDs are included in the unsatisfied comments listing, so this may end up a dangling reference. Copy resolution + add (same as resoution for CID 1234) Provide full URLs for doc references Because some members of RevCom and the Sponsor Pool may not be familiar with how to get to Mentor Minimise use of doc references Cut and paste from reference doc, where-ever possible. This minimises work for sponsor ballot members getting reference documents. Easier to audit process from slide 16 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide Style Guide See wg11-style-guide.doc from slide 17 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 20 Conference Calls Are they of any value? Next Meeting: March Any need for conference calls? from slide 18 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 21 Reference Material from slide 19 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 22 Editorial Streamlining Focus is on consistency across all TGs: Completed Streamlined ANA processes 07/0827r0 Consistent format for REDLINE contributions across TGs 07/0788r0 Consistent process for editorial comment resolution across TGs (WG & Sponsor) 07/2050r0 Guideline for technical vs. editorial, sample editorial comment responses Format for comment reporting across TGs (WG & Sponsor) 07/1990r0 (tool in 07/2116r0) Stable numbering method (See 07/2810r0) Consistent naming of redlines (See 07/2810r0) Draft templates for FRAME (no Word) to help train new editors more rapidly Under Construction (in priority order) 1.Revise the editors guideline comments on 09/1034? 2.Mentoring program Name a mentor for each new editor 3.Request in future Plenary sessions Mondays 7:30pm Frame surgery 4.MIB element numbering and compiling publish a rolled-up MIB of k/r/y 5.Guideline on non-technical front matter 6.Guideline describing expected editorial development and maturity of draft through stages in for consistency across TGs 7.Guidelines for primitives ARC to consider from slide 20 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 23 Numbering of Annexes and Clauses Proposal: TGMb will fix the ordering of annexes Ample bad precedent set by 11k Bibliography should be the final annex per IEEE Standards Style Guide Clause numbering has similar issue during rollup TGn clause 3a, 11r clause 11a, 11y clause 11.9a REVmb numbering will stay using Amendment style numbering until the very last possible moment before going to Sponsor Ballot. from slide 21 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 24 Draft naming convention Drafts and redlines are.pdf files Syntax: Draft _ [Redline [Compared to _ ]].pdf Examples: Draft P802.11n_D8.0.pdf Draft P802.11n_D8.0 Redline.pdf Draft P802.11n_D7.04 Redline Compared to P802.11n_D7.03.pdf Please use this convention for all drafts posted on the website. from slide 22 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 25 Publication Work Plan Note: to be included in the editors operations manual Here is the workflow we have used for a number of years with IEEE staff on publication of publications: 1.Editors provide FRAME source and any freestanding graphics (Powerpoint, Visio. TIF) to staff at time of REVCOM submission. 2.Editors provide a list of requests editorial corrections no later than REVCOM approval date. 3.Staff prepares a publication draft and highlights changes they have made and questions they need addressed or confirmed. This draft is sent to Task Group Editor and the Working Group Technical Editor (me). This typically occurs about 2-3 weeks after approval for publication, since the preparation work is usually (but not always) begun ahead of approval. This is also typically the draft peer reviewed by IEEE staff. 4.The Task Group Editor responds to all questions on domain specific questions, with copy to Working Group editor (me). This typically takes about 3-5 days. 5.The Working Group Technical Editor reviews responses from the Task Group editor, completes any responses, and provides a list of WG officers and voting members valid for the document as of the opening day of the Sponsor ballot. This typically only takes one additional day from the prior step as most of the work is done in parallel by the two editors. 6.Final draft is submitted by the IEEE staff to Working Group Technical Editor and Task Group Editor for sign-off. Any changes from the responses or IEEE peer review are highlighted and explained. This typically takes only one or two days more after the responses are received from the editors. 7.Task Group Editor gives final approval. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours. 8.Working Group Technical Editor signs off and provides draft to Working Group Chair. No changes are expected. This usually occurs within 24 hours and in parallel with the previous step. 9.Working Group Chair sendsto sponsor and IEEE staff letting them know the Working Group has signed off on the publication process. from slide 23 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 26 Terry Cole on Changes to MIB elements You can incrementally add to a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is, add new values and meaning pairs. You can change the description of a MIB element without deprecation at any level. That is add new text clarifying or even changing the meaning of the element to keep up with the standard. I would advise deprecation when changing the definition of some value of a MIB from one thing to another. However, I don't know of any rules requiring this. from slide 24 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 27 Publications: lessons learned When quoting baseline text inaccurately, the baseline text is changed whether or not the changes were marked. The IEEE staff will actually do the appropriate changes as if the task group had actually intended to change the baseline. Drafts can minimally quote baseline text to minimize such changes Should revisit the decision to include full context during insertion Full Annex titles have to be shown in the amendment; more importantly included normative vs. informative TGk inadvertently changed Annex A to be fully informative TGr battled to fix Annex A but caused ripples TGy r1 has brief review of significant things changed for publication In editors operations manual and during balloting, should comment that Annexes should be fully titled with good reason to vote No in balloting Slide 27 from slide 25 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 28 Publications: lessons learned (contd) Acronym rules are inconsistent Styleguide doesnt include definitions Every document is treated as standalone, thus first acronym reference must be spelled out. Even though, other amendments or baseline may have defined and used the acronym earlier. Goal should be to have as few changes between the final balloted amendment and final published amendment. How do we deal with subjective decisions made by the IEEE copy editors as their styles vary? Booleans should be capitalized: TRUE and FALSE when set to Booleans should be lower case: is true and is false (raise the issue with Style Guide update) Slide 28 from slide 26 of 11-10/0072r2 by Peter Ecclesine (Cisco Systems) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 29 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0181r0 by Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 30 Abstract Closing report for WNG SC for January 2010, January 2010, El Pueblo de la Reina de Los Angeles, California, USA from slide 2 of 11-10/0181r0 by Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission January 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 31 Three presentations at this meeting Adding 900 MHz ISM band into ( wng-900-mhz-ism- band.ppt and wng-900mhz-par-and-5c.doc) Dave Halasz Motion to take PAR and 5 Criteria to full WG Result: Yes - 15; No - 5; Abstain 14: passed Motion in full WG on Wednesday: Yes 36; no 18; Abstain 32: fails IEEE for High Speed Mobility ( wng-ieee for- high-speed-mobility.ppt) - Hiroshi Mano An Example Protocol for FastAKM ( wng) - Hiroki Nakano Does WNG think that we need tutorial session exploring the need for support for mobile communication? Result: Yes - 18; No - 1; Abstain - 7. Minutes r0 Plans for March 2010 2 2 hour sessions from slide 3 of 11-10/0181r0 by Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission January 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 32 January 2010 TGmb Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 33 Abstract Closing report for TGmb for January 2010 interim meeting in Los Angeles, California, USA. from slide 2 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 34 TGmb Status Oh, what a tangled web recirculation can be Photo credit: bicyclesonly on Flickr; used with permission (Creative Commons license)from slide 3 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 35 Accomplishments No interpretation requests received Comment processing from LB160 is making good progress 246 comments received; 104 remain (50 editorial, 54 technical) No change to end date of plan of record Recirculation letter ballot expected out of March plenary from slide 4 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 36 Major Remaining Technical Issues Tight coupling of regulatory regimes with normative behavior See 11-10/0146r0 for an overview Clause 11.3 state diagram Opportunistic Keying comment group Presentation to document existing implementation expected at March plenary meeting from slide 5 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 37 References Agenda: 11-10/0063r2 Minutes: 11-10/0075r0 from slide 6 of 11-10/0180r0 by Matthew Gast, Trapeze Networks doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 38 TGp Closing Report Date: Author: from slide 1 of 11-10/0176r0 by Lee Armstrong (Armstrong Consulting, Inc.) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 39 Abstract TGp closing report for January meetings from slide 2 of 11-10/0176r0 by Lee Armstrong (Armstrong Consulting, Inc.) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 40 January Meetings Summary Sponsor Ballot #0 close, on 22 November, 93.4 % affirmative 9 time slots during the week Completed resolution of all comments prior to and during the week, resolution document is 11-09/1200r11 Voted to go to recirculation ballot as soon as possible from slide 3 of 11-10/0176r0 by Lee Armstrong (Armstrong Consulting, Inc.) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 41 Status D10.0 will be going to recirculation ballot Weekly teleconferences planned for every 1500 Piscataway time (resuming after recirculation ballot is complete) Plan is to complete next round of comment resolutions before or during March meetings from slide 4 of 11-10/0176r0 by Lee Armstrong (Armstrong Consulting, Inc.) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 42 TGs LA Closing Report Date: Author: NameAddressAffiliationPhone Dee DenteneerHTC 37; 5656 AE Eindhoven; The Netherlands Philips ips.com from slide 1 of 11-10/0179r0 by Dee Denteneer doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 43 Abstract TGs closing report for January 2010 meeting. from slide 2 of 11-10/0179r0 by Dee Denteneer doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 44 Status TGs passed LB 159 with 85% approval rate and 809 comments (Jan 2010) During meeting Appointed Guido Hiertz as vice Chair Guenael Strutt as temporary secretary Resolved comments 57% of comments (see table) Annotated agenda in 11-10/0036r8, minutes 10/102r0 Open commentsLB 159After LA total editorial technical44997 from slide 3 of 11-10/0179r0 by Dee Denteneer doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 45 Next Steps Produce Draft 4.01 Work on submissions for March meetings (most comments have clear owners) TGs is holding teleconferences on Wednesdays through the January Plenary at 10am (ET)for up to 1 hours on the Following Dates February 3 and 17, and March 3 Goal for the March 2010TGs meeting in Orlando, USA: Resolve open comments and go to recirculation from slide 4 of 11-10/0179r0 by Dee Denteneer doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 46 Moved to schedule TGs teleconferences on february 3, and 17 and March 3 at 10:00 AM ET for a maximum of 90 minutes to resolve comments and discuss agendas. Approved by unanimous consent from slide 5 of 11-10/0179r0 by Dee Denteneer doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 47 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0172r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 48 Abstract Closing report for TGu Interworking with External Networks for January 2010, Los Angeles, California, USA from slide 2 of 11-10/0172r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 49 Initial Sponsor Ballot (#0) progress Initial meeting of TGu CRC Resolved 72 technical comments this week, with 1 remaining 9 submissions presented and approved to resolve comments r16 Next sponsor re-circulation ballot mid February 2010 Teleconferences Wednesdays at 12 ET (from 3 rd February 2010) Fridays at 11 ET (from 5 th February 2010) Plans for March 2010 Resolve 2 nd sponsor ballot comments from slide 3 of 11-10/0172r0 by Stephen McCann, RIM doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 50 January 2010 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 51 Abstract This document contains the TGv closing report for January from slide 2 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 52 Goals and Accomplishments Comment resolution from Initial Sponsor Ballot 327 comments, 327 resolutions completed, 0 remain Teleconferences Feb 16, March 2, March 9 noon-2pm Eastern from slide 3 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 53 Output Documents v-TGv-January-2010-closing- report.ppt v-tgv-january-2010-agenda.ppt v-TGv-Meeting-Minutes-January doc from slide 4 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 54 TGv Timeline Updated Sept, 2009 Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: July 07 completed Jan 08 D2.0, May 08 D3.0, Nov 08 D4.0 Re-circulation Working Group Letter Ballot: November 08 (D4.0) Mar 09 D5.0, May 09 D 6.0, July 09 D7.0, D7.0(unchanged) Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: August 09 Initial Sponsor Ballot: Oct 09 Oct 09 D7.0 Approved Sponsor Ballot: Nov 09 Jan 09 D8.0, March D9.0, April D10.0 (deleted Feb D9.0) May 12 th ( or so) for Revcom June Approval Final WG/EC Approval: July 2010 RevCom/Standards Board Approval: June 4 th /June 5 th (or so) Note: TGv PAR is authorized through Dec 2010 from slide 5 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 55 Goals for Jan 10 - Mar 2010 First Recirculation Sponsor Ballot Resolve comments from First Recirculation Sponsor Ballot Second Recirculation Sponsor Ballot from slide 6 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 56 References from slide 7 of 11-10/0177r0 by Dorothy Stanley (Aruba Networks) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 57 TGz Los Angeles Closing Report Date: 22 January 2010 Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0178r0 by Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 58 TGz Accomplishments in LA TGz resolved all of the comments received on the initial sponsor ballot The approved comment resolutions are in 11-09/1185r4 TGz approved a 15-day recirculation sponsor ballot to start when the editor has prepared TGz draft 7.0 from slide 2 of 11-10/0178r0 by Menzo Wentink (Qualcomm) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide aa Robust Audio Video Transport Streaming Atlanta Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 60 Abstract TGaa Closing Report for the IEEE Los Angeles, California Session (Jan 2010) Slide 60 from slide 2 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 61 Listen to technical proposals relevant to aa topics Complete review of interworking with 802.1Qat proposal Complete review of Intra-AC prioritization proposal Discuss and resolve review comments on Draft Stage normative/informative text corresponding to all.11aa PAR topics for inclusion into the draft v0.99 Plan for the Joint meeting with 802.1AVB in March Goals for the Meeting from slide 3 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 62 Technical Presentations Slide 62 Document number TitleAuthor(s) 09/850r2 and 10/0048r1 Alternate EDCA Parameter SetAlex Ashley 10/926r7 and 10/0137r0 Interworking with 802.1QatGanesh Venkatesan 10/0055r0Draft 0.03 Internal Review CommentsTGaa members 09/850r4 4-Queue version of Alternate EDCA Parameter Set proposal Alex Ashley Informal presentation on Harmonizing MRG and v DMS Brian Hart 10/0062r0OBSS Race ConditionAlex Ashley from slide 4 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 63 1.Listened to 4 technical presentations 2.Adopted resolutions to some internal review comments into TGaa draft (10/0055r1) 3.Adopted technical proposal in 09/850r4 into TGaa draft 4.Adopted interworking with 802.1Qat proposal in 10/0137r0 5.Planned for the joint meeting with 802.1AVB in March 2010 Accomplishments from slide 5 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 64 Goals for the March Plenary Enter March 2010 meeting with TGaa Draft 0.04 (and corresponding review comments) Resolve Internal Review comments on Draft 0.04 and empower the editor to incorporate the resolutions and produce Draft 1.0 Start first WG Letter Ballot of Draft 1.0 in the May Meeting. from slide 6 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 65 Teleconferences Mondays 11:00-12:30 Hrs ET on the following days: Feb 01, 2010 Feb 15, 2010 Mar 01, 2010 from slide 7 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 66 Output documents Meeting Minutes 10/0127r0 from slide 8 of 11-10/0157r0 by Ganesh Venkatesan, Intel; Alex Ashley, NDS doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 67 TGac January 2010 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 68 Abstract This document is the closing report for the TGac for the January 2010 session. from slide 2 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 69 Work Completed Approved a set of rules for Ad Hoc groups operation ( r5) Accepted a new revision of the TG Specification Framework document ( r3) that include: A new MAC section Accepted a new revision of the TG Channel Models Addendum document ( r10) Channel coherence time value is changed from 400 ms to 800 ms based on measurements performed by NTT ( r0) Presentations related to: Preamble structure Frame padding TGac Functional Requirements and Evaluation Methodology Multi-Channel Ad Hoc group reports are included in: MU-MIMO ( r4) Coexistence ( r3) MAC ( r6) PHY ( r3) from slide 3 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 70 TG Approved Documents r5 is the approved TGac Selection Procedure document r2 is the approved TGac Usage Model document r10 is the approved TGac Channel Models Addendum document r8 is the approved TGac Functional Requirements and Evaluation Methodology document r3 is the approved TGac Specification Framework document. from slide 4 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 71 March 2010 Goals Continue the work on the Specification Framework document and its related functional blocks. from slide 5 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 72 Conference Call Times PHY Wed Feb 10 20:00 21:00 ET MAC Thu Feb 4 11:00 12:00 ET Thu Feb 25 20:00 -21:00 ET MU-MIMO Thu Feb 18 10:00-11:00 ET Thu Mar 4 20:00-21:00 ET Coexistence March 4, 21:00-22:00 ET from slide 6 of 11-10/0170r0 by Osama Aboul-Magd (Samsung) doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 73 TGad January 2010 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 74 Abstract This document is the closing report for the TGad for the January 2010 session. from slide 2 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 75 Work Completed (1/2) Reviewed Notifications of Intent for proposals 38 new techniques proposals (30 min each) 12 to be presented in March 26 to be presented in May 4 complete proposals to be presented in May (60 min each) Evaluation Methodology 10/0067r0, TGad interference modeling for MAC simulations, Minyoung Park 09/1160r3, Update on coexistence evaluation methodology, John Barr 10/0046r1, Proposed Addition to Evaluation Methodology, Avinash Jain 09/0296r16, Update to evaluation methodology document, Eldad Perahia 10/0149r0, Proposed Evaluation Methodology Addition, Shu Kato from slide 3 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 76 Work Completed (2/2) Channel Modeling 10/0090r0, Modeling the Dynamical Human Blockage for 60 GHz WLAN Channel Models, Martin Jacob (presented by Alexander Maltsev) 10/0133r0, TGad Channel model update, Alexander Maltsev 10/0112r1, Intra-cluster response model and parameter for channel modeling at 60 GHz (Part 3), Hirokazu Sawada 09/0334r6, Channel Models for 60 GHz WLAN Systems, Alexander Maltsev Selection procedure 09/935r5, selection procedure, Matt Fischer Other technical contributions 10/0027r0, 60 GHz in-cabin channel, Alexis Paolo Garcia Ariza All task group document motions passed! Motion to adopt 09/0935r5 as the first draft of TGad selection procedure document passed 64/1/0 Motion to adopt 09/0334r6 as the first draft of TGad channel model document passed 67/1/0 Motion to adopt 09/0296r16 as the first draft of TGad evaluation methodology document passed 65/1/0 from slide 4 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 77 Goals for March 2010 New Technique Proposal Presentations Continue working on task group documents, specifically enterprise cubicle model of the channel model document from slide 5 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 78 Conference call times Not overlap with TGac Feb 25 10:00-12:00 ET Channel model March 4 10:00-12:00 ET EVM, coex from slide 6 of 11-10/0044r0 by Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 79 TGae Closing Report January 2010 Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0142r1 by Michael Montemurro, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 80 Abstract This document is the closing report for the TGae Task Group for the January 2010 session. from slide 2 of 11-10/0142r1 by Michael Montemurro, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 81 Work Completed Presentations: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-case-study-for-reduced-priority- management-frames-vehicular-safety-communication.ppthttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-case-study-for-reduced-priority- management-frames-vehicular-safety-communication.ppt Output: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-tgae-requirements-and- use-cases.dochttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-tgae-requirements-and- use-cases.doc https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-management-frame- analysis.xlshttps://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/10/ ae-management-frame- analysis.xls Teleconferences: Thursday 11am ET for 1 hour on Feb 11 and Mar 11 from slide 3 of 11-10/0142r1 by Michael Montemurro, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 82 TGae Timeline Updated Jan 2010 Initial Working Group Letter Ballot: November 10 Re-circulation Working Group Letter Ballot: March 11 Form Sponsor Ballot Pool: May 11 Initial Sponsor Ballot: July 11 Approved Sponsor Ballot: Nov 11 Final WG/EC Approval: Mar 12 RevCom/Standards Board Approval: June 12 from slide 4 of 11-10/0142r1 by Michael Montemurro, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 83 March 2010 Goals Find an Editor and Secretary for TGae Revise Requirements and Use Cases document based on inputs from other task groups and contributions. Revise Management Frame Analysis spreadsheet based on inputs from other task groups and contributions. Discuss technical presentations on mechanisms/approaches for Management Frame Prioritization. from slide 5 of 11-10/0142r1 by Michael Montemurro, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 84 IEEE TGaf Los Angeles Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0169r1 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 85 Abstract This presentation is the closing report for the first meeting of IEEE TGaf taking place the week of January 18, 2010 at the IEEE 802 Wireless Interim in Los Angeles, California from slide 2 of 11-10/0169r1 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 86 Agenda Selection of Officers Review of TVWS SG work, EC actions Regulatory amendment history Regulatory activities re TVWS Review and approve the TGaf comments re FCC Database Managers proposals Set Purpose, Principles and Vision/Outcome for this project Create a realistic timeline Approve the Purpose, Principles and Vision/Outcome Discussion of coordination with and Planning for March and teleconferences NICT presentations on Channel Model and PHY parameters from slide 3 of 11-10/0169r1 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 87 TGaf Accomplishments First meeting of the task group Held internal vote for officer candidates; both affirmed in the WG Chair: Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion (14/0/0) Vice-Chair: Peter Ecclesine, Cisco Systems (14/0/0) Discussed How we got here; SG, ExCom, NesCom Discussed the approved Scope and Purpose and the way forward Reviewed the FCC Database Managers proposals and generated responses to bring to will bring motion Held a straw poll on how we will refer to the TVWS Finalized and voted on Purpose, Principles & Vision/Outcome to guide the group through the project Requested 3 teleconferences Reviewed two NICT TVWS presentations from slide 4 of 11-10/0169r1 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 88 References FCC Second Report and Order and Memorandum and Order (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA A1.pdf)http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA A1.pdf tvws-par-nescom-form-plus-5c cbp-and-david-allens-methods af-meeting-plan-and-agenda-los-angeles af da proposal-comments af-channel-model-considerations-for-p802-11af af-phy-design-considerations-for-p802-11af from slide 5 of 11-10/0169r1 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 89 Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 90 Abstract Closing report for JTC1 ad hoc for January 2010, Los Angeles, USA from slide 2 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 91 JTC1 ad hoc discussed the status of WAPI and Progress in Atlanta Reviewed the status of WAPI in ISO/IEC it is still subject to a New Project vote but the draft has been recently modified Started a technical review of WAPI Recommended that the WG invite appropriate experts to present a tutorial on the Chinese standards process to the IEEE meeting in Beijing in May 2010 Recommended the WG liaise all IEEE Sponsor Ballot drafts to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 as a matter of course Plans for Jan 2010 Consider any JTC1 liaison issues Continue technical evaluation of WAPI from slide 3 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 92 JTC1 ad hoc recommends that a Chinese standards tutorial be held in May 10 It was decided that it might be helpful for the WG to hear a tutorial relating to the Chinese standards process in Beijing At the same time the WG could explain the IEEE standards process and status to Chinese participants in Beijing The goal would be to improve understanding and communications between the Chinese and IEEE standards practitioners Motion The JTC1 ad hoc recommends to the WG that appropriate Chinese standards groups be invited by the WG Chair to present a tutorial on the Chinese standards processes related to LAN/MAN/PAN networking technologies, in a slot in which IEEE 802 also describes its processes. This tutorial would be held sometime on Monday to Wednesday at the meeting in Beijing in May 2010 Result 13/0/0 from slide 4 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 93 JTC1 ad hoc recommends all SB draft be liaised to SC6 for review In Nov 09, a liaison was sent to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 offering to send them SB drafts, on request, for the purpose of comment and review SC6 responded this week by requesting that all SB drafts be sent to SC6 as a matter of course The WG Chair is working with the EC Chair and the IEEE-SA to determine the process required to make this happen Motion The JTC1 ad hoc recommends to the WG Chair that all drafts sent to a Sponsor Ballot or a recirculation Sponsor Ballot be liaised to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 for review and comment. Any such drafts should contain front matter and headers/footers as specified by the IEEE-SA. Result: 13/0/0 from slide 5 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 94 JTC1 ad hoc motions for consideration by the WG from slide 6 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 95 Should a Chinese standards tutorial be held in May 10? Motion The WG recommends that appropriate Chinese standards groups be invited by the WG Chair to present a tutorial on the Chinese standards processes related to LAN/MAN/PAN networking technologies, in a slot in which IEEE 802 also describes its processes. This tutorial would be held sometime on Monday to Wednesday at the meeting in Beijing in May 2010 from slide 7 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 96 Should all SB drafts be liaised to SC6 for review Motion The WG recommends that all drafts sent to a Sponsor Ballot or a recirculation Sponsor Ballot be liaised to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 for review and comment. Any such drafts should contain front matter and headers/footers as specified by the IEEE-SA. from slide 8 of 11-10/0173r0 by Andrew Myles, Cisco doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 97 IEEE Regulatory Ad Hoc Committee Closing Report Date: Authors: from slide 1 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 98 Abstract This presentation is the closing report for the Los Angeles meeting of the IEEE Regulatory Ad Hoc Committee. from slide 2 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 99 Agenda Introduction The regulatory summaries North America European Union Asia FOCUS: FCC Public Notice: Database Managers RFP Ofcom Consultation: Geolocation for Cognitive Access from slide 3 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 100 Accomplishments Provided updates on relevant regulatory actions Discussed the status of the revision of ERM TG11 Decided on comments to FCC on the TVWS Database Managers proposals; sent to RR-TAG Discussed the impact of new 5 GHz certification rules Small industry group meeting with FAA, NTIA and FCC 802.11a APs operating in DFS bands still on certification hold Changes will likely require change to Bin1 radar test; may requires additional restrictions Discussed the Ofcom consultation on Geolocation for Cognitive Access; decided response not required at this stage of the process from slide 4 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 101 Documents reg-los-angeles-meeting-plan-and-agenda-jan af da proposal-comments from slide 5 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 102 Thanks to all who participated! See you in Atlanta from slide 6 of 11-10/0182r0 by Rich Kennedy, Research In Motion doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission January 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide (321) Marvell Lane, Santa Clara, CA, Name Company Address PhoneBruce Kraemer Marvell Smart Grid ad hoc Closing Report - January 2010 Date: Authors: Abstract: Closing Report for Smart Grid ad hoc January 2010 Meeting document: r3 from slide 1 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 104 High Level Questions What is happening in Smart Grid arena? Is properly positioning its existing and pending standards and amendments for acceptance in SG? Participation in key Smart Grid activities Are there any identifiable additions or changes that should be considered to make more useful in SG domains? from slide 2 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 105 NIST PAP#2 Task 5 so farfrom slide 3 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 106 NIST PAP#2 Next Meeting PAP 2 session at OpenSG Users Group, San Fransisco, February 4, 2010:OpenSG A face-to-face meeting will take place on February 4th, 2010, starting at 8am until 3:00pm. This meeting is collocated with the OpenSG User Group meetings in San Fransisco during the week of February 1, Information about registration and the hotel venue can be found at:OpenSGfrom slide 4 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 107 Operating Point Group Discussion Harmonize operating point based upon: Operating environment 1.Inside a house Primary: Range, data rate, latency, noise environment Secondary (QoS): Reliability, availability (need to include additional layers) (bit, packet) 2. Sub-station & generating plant Range, data rate, latency, noise environment 3. Collection back haul - long range Range, data rate, latency, noise environment from slide 5 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 108 Operating Point Group Discussion Regarding request that operating point include Availability and Reliability, how to measure these parameters? Group conclusion: reuse terms from matrix E.g., Link availability is measured as failure rate per 1000 sessions from slide 6 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 109 Consideration of NIST Link budget MethodGENERAL PURPOSE LINK BUDGET CALCULATOR For arbitrary wireless communication radio links, this calculator explains the terms in the link budget and gives the user the opportunity to enter or change the parameters. Macros invoked by clicking on buttons guide the user through the various options for selecting and entering the parameters. For definiteness, the calculator uses the Hata outdoor propagation loss model. The calculator was developed as an Excel spreadsheet application by Leonard Miller. It uses a new method for calculating the link margin needed to achieve a desired reliability when there is both lognormal shadowing and Rayleigh fading.new method SOFTWARE DOWNLOAD FILE Excel spreadsheet: download request form Version 1.24, added reminder to recalculate noise power when rate is changed 1/17/06 (Complete revision history listed on page 1 of spreadsheet)download request form from slide 7 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 110 Establish Smart Grid ad hoc Provide a forum for on-going /timely review of Smart Grid topics Encourage participation from other 802 groups Initial Topics: 1. Assist in the development & completion of PAP#2 2. Refine the 900 MHz project proposal 3. Begin Coordination with 15.4g Indentify other projects that would serve Smart Grid requirements Call organizer volunteer (temporary): Bruce Kraemer Conference calls: Wednesdays at 2pm Eastern starting on Feb 10 (no call on Feb 24) from slide 8 of 11-10/0174r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission January 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide (321) Marvell Lane, Santa Clara, CA, Name Company Address PhoneBruce Kraemer Marvell Energy STAR ad hoc Closing Report - January 2010 Date: Authors: Abstract: Energy STAR closing report to WG11 January 2010 Meeting document: r0 from slide 1 of 11-10/0175r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 112 Questions to the Group What is EPA trying to do? Develop an energy efficiency test and rating system for Small Network Equipment. This includes devices such as APs Is the EPA draft test procedure written correctly? Should recommend changes to the test? Are there any identifiable additions or changes that should be considered to make achieve better Energy STAR scores? from slide 2 of 11-10/0175r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 113 Information sources EPA Energy STARInterested parties who would like to participate in this process are encouraged to send their contact information to to be added to the mailing list. Framework Document:ownloads/small_network_equip/SNE_Draft_Framework_V1_0.pdfhttp://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/new_specs/d ownloads/small_network_equip/SNE_Draft_Framework_V1_0.pdf Test Spec:ownloads/small_network_equip/SNE_Test_Procedure_v1.pdfhttp://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/new_specs/d ownloads/small_network_equip/SNE_Test_Procedure_v1.pdf from slide 3 of 11-10/0175r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission Jan 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 114 Test Configuration 5.3. Wireless UUT Configuration 1. Wireless network conditions: i. Random SSID; ii. 128-bit WPA2 encrypted network; iii. 5 GHz band for IEEE n networks; iv. 2.4 GHz band for IEEE g networks; v. An appropriate channel for the network (support OFDM over DSSS over FHSS if 158 configurable); and vi. Interference robustness or other interference mitigation technology turned on. from slide 4 of 11-10/0175r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell doc.: IEEE /0003r1 Submission January 2010 Adrian Stephens, Intel CorporationSlide 115 Conclusions No need to amend to comply No further consideration is required in WG11 Until there is a significant change issued by EPA or membership raises the topic there will be no organized output document provided to EPA and topic it will be not appear on future WG11 meeting agendas. Individuals who wish to supply comments to EPA are encouraged to do so. from slide 5 of 11-10/0175r0 by Bruce Kraemer, Marvell