1 / 13

Suggested PAR Changes

Suggested PAR Changes. Authors:. Date: 2014-01-20. Abstract. This document provides some comments on the 802.11 HEW Draft PAR & 5C Document based on 13/1410r3. . Comment Areas. Reliability Latency Mobile. RELIABILITY. Comment on 5.5 and 8.1. In 13/1410r3:

hinda
Download Presentation

Suggested PAR Changes

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. Suggested PAR Changes Authors: • Date:2014-01-20 Yee et.al., MediaTek

  2. Abstract • This document provides some comments on the 802.11 HEW Draft PAR & 5C Document based on 13/1410r3. Yee et.al., MediaTek

  3. Comment Areas • Reliability • Latency • Mobile Yee et.al., MediaTek

  4. Yee et.al., MediaTek RELIABILITY

  5. Comment on 5.5 and 8.1 • In 13/1410r3: • In section 5.5 ‘Need for the Project’, P3L40: “With the real-time performance requirements of some of these applications, WLAN users demand improved reliability in delivering their applications. ” • Comment: While ‘reliability’ is desirable, what does it mean here in the context of densely deployed real-time applications in the presence of interference? If we mean to say ‘reliably’ meeting real-time performance requirements, it is better to not add ‘reliability’ as a metric. • Suggested Change: “WLAN users increasing demand that Withthe real-time performance requirements of some of these applications are met in dense deployments and in the presence of interference , WLAN users demand improved reliability in delivering their applications.” Yee et.al., MediaTek

  6. Comment on 5.5 and 8.1 (cont’d) • In 13/1410r3: • In section 8.1 ‘Additional Explanatory Notes’, P5L23, as one of the three categories of objectives to improve WLAN efficiency: “Increased robustness to outdoor propagation characteristics and increase uplink transmission reliability” • Comment: How is ‘reliability’ different from robustness? In the referenced Simulation Scenarios document 11-13-1001r5, only ‘robustness’ is mentioned and not ‘reliability’. • Suggested Change: “Increased robustness toin outdoor propagation environments characteristicsand increase uplink transmission reliability” Yee et.al., MediaTek

  7. Strawpoll • Do you accept the Reliability related changes proposed on slides 5 and 6? • Y/N/A Yee et.al., MediaTek

  8. Yee et.al., MediaTek Latency

  9. Comment on 8.1 and 5.2b • In 13/1410r3: • Section 5.2b ‘Scope of the project’: “average throughput per station ” is the only metric mentioned. • Section 8.1 ‘Additional Explanatory Notes’, P4L39: “These metrics, along with the satisfaction of the packet delay and the packet loss requirements of applications, will directly correspond to user experience in identified scenarios.” • Comments: ‘delay’ is described as another metric on par with average throughput per station, but it is not alluded to in the scope. • Suggested Change in 5.2.b: “at least two (2) times improvement in applicable metrics such as the average throughput per station ” Yee et.al., MediaTek

  10. Strawpoll • Do you accept the changes proposed on slide 9? • Y/N/A Yee et.al., MediaTek

  11. Yee et.al., MediaTek Mobile

  12. HEW’s Role in Mobile Offloading • In 13/1410r3 : • Section 8.1 clearly identified: ‘indoor and outdoor hotspots’ as a main expected usage model, which includes offloading operator mobile traffic as a primary application. • Mobile devices account for the bulk of WLAN traffic growth in recent years and the trend will continue. HEW needs more visibility into the future of mobile offloading. • In addition, we all know 3GPP is investigating operating in the unlicensed bands. We need more information and not design HEW in the blind. • Suggested Change: • Add to the end of Section 8.1 “This amendment should take into account developments in 3GPP related to future mobile offload and coexistence needs.” • In 7.2 “Joint Development” , Replace “No” with “Yes, liaison should be establish with 3GPP to better understand future mobile offload and coexistence needs.” Yee et.al., MediaTek

  13. Strawpoll • Do you accept the changes proposed on slide 12? • Y/N/A Yee et.al., MediaTek

More Related