VHT SG November 2007 Report

1. VHT SG November 2007 Report Authors: Date: 2007-11-14 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

2. Patent Policy • Following 5 slides Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

3. Highlights of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards • Participants have a duty to tell the IEEE if they know (based on personal awareness) of potentially Essential Patent Claims they or their employer own • Participants are encouraged to tell the IEEE if they know of potentially Essential Patent Claims owned by others • This encouragement is particularly strong as the third party may not be a participant in the standards process • Working Group required to request assurance • Early assurance is encouraged • Terms of assurance shall be either: • Reasonable and nondiscriminatory, with or without monetary compensation; or, • A statement of non-assertion of patent rights • Assurances • Shall be provided on the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved LOA form • May optionally include not-to-exceed rates, terms, and conditions • Shall not be circumvented through sale or transfer of patents • Shall be brought to the attention of any future assignees or transferees • Shall apply to Affiliates unless explicitly excluded • Are irrevocable once submitted and accepted • Shall be supplemented if Submitter becomes aware of other potential Essential Patent Claims • A “Blanket Letter of Assurance” may be provided at the option of the patent holder • A patent holder has no duty to perform a patent search • Full policy available at http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6 1 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

4. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards 6.2 Policy IEEE standards may be drafted in terms that include the use of Essential Patent Claims. If the IEEE receives notice that a [Proposed] IEEE Standard may require the use of a potential Essential Patent Claim, the IEEE shall request licensing assurance, on the IEEE Standards Board approved Letter of Assurance form, from the patent holder or patent applicant. The IEEE shall request this assurance without coercion. The Submitter of the Letter of Assurance may, after Reasonable and Good Faith Inquiry, indicate it is not aware of any Patent Claims that the Submitter may own, control, or have the ability to license that might be or become Essential Patent Claims. If the patent holder or patent applicant provides an assurance, it should do so as soon as reasonably feasible in the standards development process. This assurance shall be provided prior to the Standards Board’s approval of the standard. This assurance shall be provided prior to a reaffirmation if the IEEE receives notice of a potential Essential Patent Claim after the standard’s approval or a prior reaffirmation. An asserted potential Essential Patent Claim for which an assurance cannot be obtained (e.g., a Letter of Assurance is not provided or the Letter of Assurance indicates that assurance is not being provided) shall be referred to the Patent Committee. A Letter of Assurance shall be either: a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the Submitter without conditions will not enforce any present or future Essential Patent Claims against any person or entity making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing, distributing, or implementing a compliant implementation of the standard; or b) A statement that a license for a compliant implementation of the standard will be made available to an unrestricted number of applicants on a worldwide basis without compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination. At its sole option, the Submitter may provide with its assurance any of the following: (i) a not-to-exceed license fee or rate commitment, (ii) a sample license agreement, or (iii) one or more material licensing terms. 2 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

5. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards Copies of an Accepted LOA may be provided to the working group, but shall not be discussed, at any standards working group meeting. The Submitter and all Affiliates (other than those Affiliates excluded in a Letter of Assurance) shall not assign or otherwise transfer any rights in any Essential Patent Claims that are the subject of such Letter of Assurance that they hold, control, or have the ability to license with the intent of circumventing or negating any of the representations and commitments made in such Letter of Assurance. The Submitter of a Letter of Assurance shall agree (a) to provide notice of a Letter of Assurance either through a Statement of Encumbrance or by binding any assignee or transferee to the terms of such Letter of Assurance; and (b) to require its assignee or transferee to (i) agree to similarly provide such notice and (ii) to bind its assignees or transferees to agree to provide such notice as described in (a) and (b). This assurance shall apply to the Submitter and its Affiliates except those Affiliates the Submitter specifically excludes on the relevant Letter of Assurance. If, after providing a Letter of Assurance to the IEEE, the Submitter becomes aware of additional Patent Claim(s) not already covered by an existing Letter of Assurance that are owned, controlled, or licensable by the Submitter that may be or become Essential Patent Claim(s) for the same IEEE Standard but are not the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, then such Submitter shall submit a Letter of Assurance stating its position regarding enforcement or licensing of such Patent Claims. For the purposes of this commitment, the Submitter is deemed to be aware if any of the following individuals who are from, employed by, or otherwise represent the Submitter have personal knowledge of additional potential Essential Patent Claims, owned or controlled by the Submitter, related to a [Proposed] IEEE Standard and not already the subject of a previously submitted Letter of Assurance: (a) past or present participants in the development of the [Proposed] IEEE Standard, or (b) the individual executing the previously submitted Letter of Assurance. 3 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

6. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards The assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal. The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those Patent Claims, or for determining whether any licensing terms or conditions are reasonable or non-discriminatory. Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted as giving rise to a duty to conduct a patent search. No license is implied by the submission of a Letter of Assurance. In order for IEEE’s patent policy to function efficiently, individuals participating in the standards development process: (a) shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware and that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance, owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents; and (b) should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance. 4 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

7. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings • 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 fixing product prices, allocation of customers, or dividing 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. --------------------------------------------------------------- If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org or visit http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details. This slide set is available at http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt 5 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

8. Further Information • IEEE Code of Ethics • http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html • IEEE-SA Affiliation FAQ • http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html • IEEE-SA Antitrust & Competition Policy • http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf • IEEE-SA LETTER OF ASSURANCE (LOA) FORM • http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/loa.pdf • IEEE-SA STANDARDS BOARD PATENT COMMITTEE (PATCOM) INFORMATION • http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html • IEEE-SA PATENT FAQ • http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/faq.pdf • IEEE 802 LAN / MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE (LMSC) POLICIES & PROCEDURES • http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/policies-and-procedures.pdf • IEEE 802.11 WLANS WORKING GROUP POLICIES & PROCEDURES • http://www.ieee802.org/11/DocFiles/06/11-06-0812-03-0000-802-11-policies-and-proceedures.htm Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

9. Essential Patents • Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for the use of this standard? Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

10. Review from September • Presentations • ITU/WRC Spectrum And Usage Allocation For Terahertz Frequencies • Analysis on IEEE 802.11n MAC Efficiency • Review of TGn’s Usage Models • IMT-Advanced Status Report • VHT Applications • Straw polls probing the will of the SG • Requested WFA for a presentation on usage scenarios • Initial presentation in Nov Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

11. May 2007 Initial meeting July 2007 Presentations WG approval of SG extension Sept 2007 Presentations Nov 2007 Presentations Initial version of PAR & 5 C’s Jan 2008 Presentations final version of PAR & 5 C’s WG approval Mar 2008 WG reaffirmation? Presentations EC approval on Mar 21 May 2008 Meet as Ad Hoc? NesCom submission by May 2 Jun 2008 NesCom meeting on June 11 July 2008 Task Group starts Time Line Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

12. Call for Submissions • Information on following subjects will assist us in creating a PAR and 5 Criteria: • Market needs, applications, usage scenarios • Technology & feasibility • MAC efficiency evaluation and enhancements, including evaluation of 11n MAC with higher PHY rates • PHY enhancements to 11n • new MAC & PHY technology • Requirements • metrics (i.e. throughput, network capacity, spectral efficiency, range) • coexistence / interoperability • Spectrum availability & regulatory options • relationship with IMT-Advanced Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

13. Submissions • WFA presentation on use cases, 11-07/2792, Rolf • 11-07-2780-00-0vht-multi-band-modulation-coding-and-medium-access-control.ppt, Robert Heath • 11-07-2704-00-0vht-efficiency-of-voip-on-802-11n.ppt, Darwin • 11-07/2793, Vinko (Mon ) • 11-07/2790, “60 GHz Standards and Technology”, Sheung Li, 10am • 11-07/2603 from September, “Per-User Data Rate, Band and Bandwidth Options for VHT”, Jason (Wed preferred) • 07/2863 ,Presentation on Process & Procedures for TG, Andrew Myles (Wed) • 07/2860r0, A comparison of 802.11n with DYNAMIC OFDMA based WLANs, Marc Emmelmann (Wed) • Darwin, 07/2886 • Vinko, 07/2861 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

14. Agenda • Monday November 12, 8:00 – 11:00 • Patent policy, etc. • Call for submissions • Motion for extension of study group • Discussion of alternate timeline • Presentations • Wednesday November 14, 8:00 – 10:00 • Reaffirm agenda • presentions • 9:30am • Review time line • Discuss starting discussion of PAR • Goals for January • Set up conference calls Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

15. May 2007 Initial meeting July 2007 Presentations WG approval of SG extension Sept 2007 Presentations Nov 2007 Presentations Motion for extension Jan 2008 Presentations Initial version of PAR & 5 C’s Mar 2008 Presentations Work on PAR & 5 C’s May 2008 final version of PAR & 5 C’s WG approval July 2008 EC approval on July 18 Aug 2008 NesCom submission by Aug 8 Sept 2008 (last VHT SG meeting) NesCom meeting on Sept 17 Nov 2008 Task Group starts Alternate Time Line Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

16. Motion Move to request the IEEE 802.11 Working Group to extend the VHT Study Group for another 6 months. Moved Don Schultz Second Adrian Result: 48-0-1 • Meeting was an ad hoc, so this was actually a straw poll, and vote needs to be taken again Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

17. Presentations for Monday November 12 • Wi-Fi Alliance (WFA) VHT Study Group Usage Models, 11-07/2792, Rolf, 20min • 11-07-2780-00-0vht-multi-band-modulation-coding-and-medium-access-control.ppt, Robert Heath, 20 min • 11-07-2704-00-0vht-efficiency-of-voip-on-802-11n.ppt, Darwin, 20 min • 11-07/2603 from September, “Per-User Data Rate, Band and Bandwidth Options for VHT”, Jason (Wed preferred), 20 min • 11-07/2793, Vinko (Mon ), 20 min • 11-07/2790, “60 GHz Standards and Technology”, Sheung Li, 10am Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

18. Minutes for Mon, Nov 12 • Reviewed patent slides • Discussed number of presentations, PAR development, timeline & alternate • Super majority agreed to defer PAR development and give time to presentations • Pass motion for extension • Set agenda • Need to reaffirm on Wed Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

19. 11-07/2792 • Q & A • Solomon: What is difference between medical apps in Cat 1 & Cat 2? • Cat 1: high rate, short delay, ie. Surgery • Cat 2: fiber back bone, WLAN for connectivity • Adrian: in TGn a long list of usage models was made, but then only three were used, are all these mandatory, or can these be prioritized? • Won’t decide on mandatory or optional • Will consider prioritization • Adrian: factory - QoS requirements? Need to know if they are more stringent • Eldad: range expectation? • Marc De Courville: outdoor hotspot, complementary WAN/LAN, cellular • Invited to participate to contribute Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

20. 11-07-2780 • Q&A • Solomon: 1) concurrent operation of radio at 2.4 & 60? (2) use training at 2.4 for use in 60? (3) data tx in parallel at both bands? • Yes to all • Brian: will need AGC at 60 GHz which requires training; would like to add another requirement: reuse efficiency • Adrian: there will be coexistence issues with 2.4 & 5 GHz • Don: proposing 60 GHz, and then 300 GHz • 60 GHz available now • Don: coexistence with 15.3c? • Will need to address • Eldad: coexistence will be difficult with packet split over different bands, due to different ranges and different OBSS conditions in different bands Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

21. 11-07-2605 • Marc De Courville: do you have a stronger recommendation for 5 or 60GHz? • No, depends on desired usages and other issues • Marc: trade-off between two bands seems to be RFIC vs digital baseband • Brian: given thought to two PARs: 5GHz and 60 GHz • Interesting possibility • James: distinct identity from 15.3c? • Hasn’t heard 15.3c address WLAN applications? Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

22. 07/2793 • Solomon: do you conclude only way is to use steered direction antenna? • Yes Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

23. 07/2790 • Dave Britz: tx power needs to account for device constraints, i.e. battery based mobile devices • Power comes from not only PA, but also from antenna gain • Also need to consider reduced time on air which saves power • Vinko: 30dBi gain antenna on one side or both ends of the link? And, how hard is it to build 30dBi? • 30 dBi on each end Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

24. Agenda for Wednesday November 14 • Reaffirm agenda • Reaffirm SG Extension motion • Presentations • 9:40am • Review time line • Discuss starting development of PAR • Goals for January • Set up conference calls Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

25. Presentations for Wednesday November 14 • 07/2863, Presentation on Process & Procedures for TG, Andrew Myles (Wed) • 07/2860r0, A comparison of 802.11n with DYNAMIC OFDMA based WLANs, Marc Emmelmann (Wed) • Darwin, 07/2886 • Vinko, 07/2861 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

26. Motion Move to request the IEEE 802.11 Working Group to extend the VHT Study Group for another 6 months. Moved Marc Emmelman Second Darwin Engwer Result: 72-0-0 Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

27. Minutes for Wed, Nov 14 • 07/2863 • Peter E: need to coexist with legacy; change acceptance to 50% • Bruce: disagree to parts of logic tree, but warrants further time discussion; discussion may need to occur in WG since it may impact other TGs • Rolf: number of assertions that don’t agree with: that VHT is revolutionary; that standard is too complex; concept of consortiums • Jim Lansford: defined products could lead to 802.15.3a result • Marc Emmelman: complete proposals doesn’t allow for good ideas from partial proposals Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

28. 07/2860 • Eldad: goodput looks low for high SNR (15%) • Bruce: don’t understand advantage at low SNR vs high SNR with small packets • Multi-user diversity, adapting to channel for each sub-carrier • Houngyun: question about aggregation used • Marc De Courville: what form of gain will remain compared to TxBf? Would SDMA be better? Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

29. 07/2886 • Peter: lots of issues to consider in each tech axes, groups will have to each pick their subset • Marc De Courville: key in presentation is idea to split PAR Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

30. 07/2861 Do you think that 2x PHY datarate increase and some aggregate throughput gains would justify 5+ year development of VHT system in below 6 GHz frequency bands? Yes: 9 No: 23 Don’t know or abstain: 53 -Darwin: discussion of history of PHY development -Frank: desires bits/Hz metric -Marc: compute Shannon capacity to see potential Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

31. Goals for January • Presentations related to “call for submissions” • WFA update on use cases • Start work on PAR & 5 C’s • Decisions about operating band • Decisions about # of PAR’s • Discussion on process/ selection procedure • IMT-Advanced update Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation

32. Conference call times • Possible date/time: • Thursday, January 3, 11:00 Eastern Time • one hour • Topics: • Darwin’s PAR submission • range • Feasibility • Amendment vs. new standard Eldad Perahia, Intel Corporation