50 likes | 62 Views
This presentation discusses improving co-located interference reports by addressing jamming effects. It proposes a change to include an 'Interference Level = 127' for absence indication to account for jamming interference scenarios. The normative reference is IEEE 802.11-07/2737r0.
E N D
Jamming Co-Located Interference Report Authors: Jing Zhu, Intel Corp.
Abstract • This presentation describes the basic idea of improving co-located interference report to include the jamming effect regarding the comment #96. Jing Zhu, Intel Corp.
What is the issue? • No explicit absence indication – the outcome of jamming co-located interference • resource conflict (such as antenna sharing) or other complicated multi-band / multi-channel operations may also cause absence • Power and frequency information is not always known for a jamming interference Jing Zhu, Intel Corp.
Proposed Change: reserve “Interference Level = 127” for absence indication • the Interference Level field set to 127indicates that the reporting STA is not able to receive due to jamming co-located interference or other reasons during the reported interference periods, regardless of the actual interference level and frequency. Jing Zhu, Intel Corp.
Normative Text • IEEE 802.11-07/2737r0 Jing Zhu, Intel Corp.