1 / 14

EHT PAR and CSD Comments

This document contains comments and responses from various authors regarding the IEEE 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD. Topics discussed include minimum data rate requirements, latency and jitter objectives, backward compatibility, acronyms clarification, throughput in dense deployment scenarios, and support for emerging applications.

lramirez
Download Presentation

EHT PAR and CSD Comments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EHT PAR and CSD Comments • Date: 2019-03-14 Authors: Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  2. Abstract • EHT PAR and CSD comments and responses Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  3. Nikolichcomments on 802.11 EHT PAR • In 5.5 Need for the Project: it may be helpful to specify the specific each of the minimum data rate requirements for the various applications, e.g., 4k and 8k video, virtual reality, etc.  • Response: Minimum data requirements were included in the updated 5.5 • 2) In 5.5 Need for the Project: latency, stringent real-time delay and jitter are identified, but quantitative objectives are not specified. Perhaps quantifying objectives for these parameters in 5.2.b Scope of the project will be helpful, similar to the at least 30 Gbps  maximum throughput requirement identified in 5.2.b. • Response: Minimum requirements for gaming applications were included in the updated 5.5 • 3) 5.2.b: Please consider replacing "legacy IEEE802.11 devices" with "legacy devices compliant with IEEE 802.11-2016, etc.*" and "IEEE802.11ax devices" with "devices compliant with the ratified version of P802.11ax". • *add the relevant ratified amendments for this project.  The intent of this comment is for the proposed project to consider being as specific as is practical regarding backwards compatibility. • Response: Thank you for your comment. The group believes that more generic description of the existing devices should be included in 5.2b Project Scope. • 4) 8.1: Please consider spelling out all the acronyms to help the IEEE Standards Association New Standards Committee members that are not familiar with 802.11 nomenclature better understand this section. • Response: Thank you. All first use of acronyms are spelled out. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  4. 802.21 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR • 5.2.b: Scope of the project: • It says: “This amendment defines standardized modifications to both the 802.11 physical layers (PHY) and the 802.11 Medium Access Control Layer (MAC) that enable at least one mode of operation capable of supporting a maximum throughput of at least 30 Gbps, as measured at the MAC data service access point (SAP), …” • Comment: What is the expected average throughput per station in a dense deployment scenario?  • Response: The expected average throughput is dependent on the parameters of the scenario. The primary objective of 802.11be project is not to improve average throughput in a dense environment. • The scope does not mention about the latency and jitter while 'Section 5.5: Need for the project' does discuss about the reduced latency and jitter.  •  2) Comment: It is not clear if very low latency and jitter are in scope of the project. Also what are the targeted values for latency and jitter?  Please include the low latency and jitter in the scope of the project and support the values that are required for emerging applications. Example: To support VR applications, very low latency and jitter are required. Please refer to Section 7.2 of https://mentor.ieee.org/802.21/dcn/18/21-18-0061-04-0000-a-white-paper-on-use-cases-and-requirements-for-supporting-hmd-based-vr-applications.docx • Response: The scope of the project was updated to include as statement of latency and jitter. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  5. 802.21 comments on 802.11 EHT CSD • CSD: • 1.2.3 Distinct Identity • 1) Suggestion: If the scope includes very low latency and jitter, it could be another distinct identity. • Response: Thank you for the suggestion. The scope does not explicitly include low latency and jitter, therefore it was not included in the CSD 1.2.3 Distinct Identity. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  6. 802.15 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • PAR: • 5.2b: The PAR scope should include a sentence to the effect: This amendment identifies and provides an analysis of coexistence with other 802 standards. Where possible, methods of interference mitigation are discussed and defined. • Response: Identification of and analysis of coexistence with other 802 standards is the purview of the coexistence assurance document. Likewise discussion of methods of interference mitigation also can be provided in the CAD. No changes made. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  7. 802.3 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • PAR: • General: Again the PAR submitted for review appears to not be output from myProject, increasing the potential for error and miscommunication. • Response: The PDF was used to create the Doc file to ease the ability to make changes. The document that was sent for review is the working copy. The PAR as filed is posted as https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/19/11-19-0244-00-0eht-eht-par-document.docx • 1.1 It appears the project as been assigned the amendment number 802.11be (http://www.ieee802.org/PARs.shtml), replace “tbd” with “be”. • Response: Thank you. Change has been made. • 5.1 Is 200 the number of people actively working on draft development or the number of people expected to participate in WG ballot? We believe it should be the former. • Response: There are 329 voting members in 802.11 WG and we expect at least 200 participants in the draft development. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  8. 802.3 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • PAR: • 5.2.b Your reference to “IEEE802.11ax devices” is not a valid reference for a PAR. IEEE Std 802.11ax does not exist (the project is an unapproved draft at this point and therefore is appropriately referenced as P802.11ax), highlighting that there is no dependency cited in 5.3 of the PAR. • Response: Thank you. The scope has been updated to address this comment. • 5.2.b Similarly, the reference to “IEEE802.11” is not a specific reference to the approved revision. We believe the issue is to support “backward interoperability with legacy IEEE Std 802.11 compliant devices . . .” The term “compatibility” is ambiguous and should clarify if it means coexistence or interoperability. • Response: References to IEEE Std 802.11 compliant devices have been corrected in the updated scope. We believe that the term “compatibility” is clear as coexistence is called out separately. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  9. 802.3 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • PAR: • 5.3 Dependence on another standard question not answered. Please answer appropriately, from the Project Scope and reference in 8.1 it would appear that at least P802.11ax should be specified here. • Response: Change has been made to indicate the dependencies in 5.3. • 8.1 The shorthand “802.11ax” in the last line is not a specific reference. Please fix. • Response: The referenced text has been removed. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  10. 802.3 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • CSD : • 1.2.1, a) The citation of Cisco numbers rather than independent market research data is not appropriate. • Response: The Cisco VNI is compiled from a superset of information available to any one independent analyst. The Cisco VNI has a track record of accuracy. Therefore the use of this information in the CSD supports Broad Sets of Applicability for this project. • 1.2.1, a) Unexpanded acronym “Cisco VNI”. Please expand VNI if text is retained. • Response: A change was made to expand the acronym. • 1.2.1, b) Change “Strategy analytics” to “Strategy Analytics” • Response: The change was made in the latest version. Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  11. 802.3 comments on 802.11 EHT PAR and CSD • CSD: • 1.2.3 Isn’t P802.11ax overlapping in “improved performance”? • Response: P802.11ax addresses performance in high density environments. This project focuses on improved overall performance. • 1.2.4 b) Generic “IEEE 802.11” should be “IEEE Std 802.11” • Response: Changed initial phrase from “IEEE Std. 802.11 is a mature technology which has a wide variety of legacy devices and a proven track record” to “IEEE Std. 802.11 technology is very mature and has a wide variety of legacy devices and a proven track record” Michael Montemurro (BlackBerry)

  12. 802.1 comments on 802.11be – Enhancements for Extremely High Throughput (EHT), PAR and CSD • PAR: • 5.2b Scope of the project: • Section 5.5 of the PAR discusses reduced latency and jitter, however, the scope does not mention latency. Techniques addressing the low latency needs of the PAR would be out of scope for the project with the current scope of the PAR. Include bounded latency and jitter in the scope. • Response: The scope of the project was updated to include as statement of latency and jitter. 802.1

  13. 802.1 comments on 802.11be – Enhancements for Extremely High Throughput (EHT), PAR and CSD • PAR • 5.5 Need for the Project: • The techniques used to offer end-to-end high throughput and low latency via multiple hops of a network strongly affect each other, therefore, there should be a recognition of the relevance of Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) standards. We understand that TSN techniques may require extensions to support EHT. Please make the following changes: • After “cloud computing” add “, including over mixed wired & wireless LANs.” • After “enhanced reliability” add “synchronized time,” • Replace “supporting their applications over WLAN” with “supporting their applications over heterogeneous Ethernet and Wireless LANs, for which Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) techniques are potential candidates” • Response: Changes made to the need of the project in the direction of the comment. 802.1

  14. 802.1 comments on 802.11be – Enhancements for Extremely High Throughput (EHT), PAR and CSD • CSD • 1.2.3 Distinct Identity • It only mentions: “This project will focus on increasing capacity and link throughput of WLAN.” Section 5.5 of the PAR discusses reduced latency and jitter, which should be mentioned in this section of the CSD as well. • IEEE 802.1 Time-Sensitive Networking standards address problems of providing bounded end-to-end latency. These techniques may be applicable. Therefore, TSN should be mentioned in this section of the CSD. • Response: A statement on latency and jitter in 1.2.3 Distinct Identity was added. The TGbe will look at many functions to improve latency and jitter, including features from TSN. 802.1

More Related