Discussion Procedure for Regulatory and Coexistence Issues

1. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Discussion Procedure for Regulatory and Coexistence Issues] Date Submitted: [January 17, 2006] Source: [Ryuji Kohno,Shinsuke Hara, and Kenichi Takizawa, Yuko Rikuta,] Company [National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT)] Contact: Ryuji Kohno. Voice:[+81 46 847 5104, E-Mail: kohno@nict.go.jp] Abstract: [Discussion Procedure for Regulatory and Coexistence Issues] Purpose: [To help the discussion for answering no-vote comments to 15.4a draft] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. Slide

2. Discussion Procedure for Regulatory and Coexistence Issues Ryuji Kohno, Shinsuke Hara, Ken-ich Takizawa NICT Slide

3. Agenda for discussion • Regulatory requirement is to ensure coexistence by reasonable interference reduction technology, e.g. DAA, LDC. • Pick up and review the technical requirements (TRs) regarding “regulatory and coexistence issues” (pp.70-85) • Discuss remedies for them. • Regulatory issues • (1) Necessity of Interference reduction technology, e.g. DAA • (2) Introduction and discussion of feasible DAA • (3) Summary of issues in DAA for regulatory compliance • 2.Coexistence issues • (1) Category of coexistence problem • (2) Solution for regulatory requirement, i.e. simple DAA, LDC • (3) Definition of LDC: necessary duty cycle in node & PCN etc Slide

4. Note • We will discuss mainly the regulatory and coexistence issues in UWB band • The group proposing CSS in ISM band should separately discuss and show a possible coexistence between CSS and 11g and so on (they are responsible for filling out the blanks pointed by letter ballot) • In addition, the group proposing Sub-G UWB should separately discuss and show a possible coexistence between Sub-G UWB and 15.4(b) and so on Slide

5. 1. Regulatory Issues 150(E), 324(E), 645(TR), 646(TR), 647(TR), 660(TR), 696(TR), 698(TR), 722(TR),732(TR), 736(TR), 741(TR), 750, 754, 775, 788, 796 722 736 Slide

6. (1) Necessity of Interference reduction technology, e.g. DAA:Interference study (1/2) Next generation(4G) Cellular phone (Mobile station) • Assumption: • Activity factor: 5% • Free space propagation • Antenna gain: 0dBi • UWB signal level is -70dBm/MHz Acceptable • p(I>PSL) means the probability that interference signal level exceeds the permissible one. • I1% means the interference level at p( I>PSL)=1%. • UWB signal level is -41.3dBm/MHz Interference reduction scheme, e.g. DAA, is needed Not Acceptable Slide

7. (1) Necessity of Interference reduction technology, e.g. DAA:Interference study (2/2) Next generation Cellular phone (Base station) • Assumption: • Activity factor: 5% • Wall attenuation: 12dB • Free space propagation • Antenna gain: 0dBi • UWB signal level is -70dBm/MHz Acceptable • p(I>PSL) means the probability that interference signal level exceeds the permissible one. • I1% means the interference level at p( I>PSL)=1%. • UWB signal level is -41.3dBm/MHz Interference reduction scheme, e.g. DAA is needed Not Acceptable Slide

8. (2) Introduction and discussion of feasible DAA We also received the following e-mail after this Monday’s discussion: Date:         Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:40:37 -1000Reply-To: joe@MCCI.COMFrom: Joe Decuir <joe@MCCI.COM>Organization: MCCISubject: [802.15.4A] first cut at simple TG4a UWB DAA supportTo: STDS-802-15-4A@listserv.ieee.org This proposes to • allow a system with simple nodes & smart piconet controller(s) to implement DAA where needed. • keep the nodes cheap and simple Slide

9. The points are 1) two pieces: a request for information, and the responding report1.1) the piconet says: tell me how much energy you measure, over how much time, in which channel1.2) the device replies to that specific request with a measured number2) create an informative annex that describes how the combination of elements could be used for simple DAA mitigation by a network.   He is ready for presentation. Let’s pay attention to it. Slide

10. PNC node PNC node (3-1) Impact of DAA in UWB performance victim system b1 b2 b3 frequency without DAA with DAA victim system victim system interference no interference PNC should support a detection (e.g., energy) functionality. band allocation (b1,b2, or b3 ) band allocation (b2 or b3) Channel b1 is not assigned. if channel b1 is assigned to piconets, thises piconets cause interference to the victim system. Remark: Without DAA, UWB will be suffered by strong interference from other radio, in particular at ranging mode requesting high SINR. Slide

11. Strategy: Degradation of UWB performance due to limited available channels by DAA • Spreading sequence (C) • TH hopping pattern (C and NC) victim system • Spreading sequence (C) • TH hopping pattern (C and NC) • Pulse shaping (C and partial NC) SOP interference victim system band allocation SOP interference By using DAA, the number of available channels would decrease. -> SOP interference will increase. PNC PNC node node band allocation SOP interference could be reduced by using optional pulse shaping (such as CoU, CS, and Linear combination) which give another orthogonality. (3-2) Strategy for DAA Slide

12. PNC node (3-3)Summary of issues in DAA • We need to consider the following issues. • How to detect signals from victim systems at the PNC • Is one of CCA mode 1(energy detection), 2(carrier detection), or 3(1 and 2) applicable ? • How to send request to measure the signal level (from the nodes to the PNC) and respond the measured values (from the PNC to the nodes). • How to determine the initial channel. victim system PNC should support a detection (e.g., energy) functionality. Request Initial channel Reply Slide

13. 2. Coexistence Issues 352(E), 353(E), 354(T), 355(T), 356(T), 357(T), 358(T), 359(T), 360(T), 361(T), 362(T), 363(T), 364(T), 365(T),366(T), 367(T), 368(T), 369(T), 370(T), 371(T), 372(T), 373(T), 374(T), 375(T), 376(T), 377(T), 446(T), 550(TR), 551(TR), 678(T), 664(TR), 677(TR), 678(TR), 679(TR), 680(TR), 681(TR), 682(TR), 683(TR), 684(TR), 685(TR), 686(TR), 687(TR), 688(TR), 689(TR), 690(TR), 691(TR), 692(TR), 693(TR), 694(TR), 696(TR), 697(TR), 698(TR), 700(TR), 721(TR), 731(TR), 732(TR), 759, 775, 792, 793, 796 687 691 692 Slide

14. 721 731 732 Slide

15. (1) Category of coexistence problem • Coexistence between 802.15.4a systems and other systems such as 802.16 (and 4G systems) • Coexistence between UWB systems such as 4a and 3a-like systems (MB-OFDM and DS-UWB) This coexistence is possible by introducing a DAA mechanism of CCA mode 1 or 2 in “6.9.9” discussed previously A mechanism to detect the UWB signals in 4a PHY and MAC may be required Slide

16. (2) Solution for regulatory requirement, i.e. simple DAA, LDC Necessity of the reason why LDC is good enough for suppression of interference to coexisting victim radio instead of DAA • The reason for using 1% duty cycle in 2.4GHz band is vague • Why don’t we introduce duty cycle in UWB band? • Can LDC solve all coexistence problems? If no, what can we do for solution? • What is duty cycle? • Why and how is the value of 1% selected? • Is the value guaranteed for a device-to-device link or a piconet? • If the value is valid for a device-to-device link, then how can we guarantee such a low duty cycle for multiple piconet environments? Slide

17. (3) Definition of LDC • We suggest to have an Annex to show • The Annex should clearly show that LDC can solve all the coexistence problems. Otherwise, a DAA mechanism should be introduced in 4a standard • This is also closely related to the following comments regarding ALOHA: • the definition of LDC (low duty cycle) and its value, say, 1% • how to guarantee the value in multiple piconet environments Slide

18. 303(E), 305(E), 340(E), 442(T), 520(T), 696(TR), 697(TR), 742(TR),743(TR) 696 697 742 743 Slide

19. F2.3 Applicable European rules to be updated in April 2006 in Annex F(informative): IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.4a regulatory requirements • In Europe, Draft ECC Decision ECC/DEC/(06)AA was under "public consultation" until the 24th of December 2005. A total of 67 comments were made, which will be dealt with during next meeting of the corresponding CEPT Task Group (TG3). The current version of the Decision allows UWB operation with the following emission limits (Table F2.3.1). • It should be noted that the ECC Decision intends to deliver a clear message that the band 6 to 9 GHz is identified in Europe for long-term UWB operation without additional mitigation techniques. • Some issues are expected to be solved end of March 2006 during the ECC meeting, from the revision proposal of the CEPT/TG3 February meeting. Indeed the TG3 meeting in February will try to solve the comments received during the public consultation. And the particular issue on the use of LDC as a relevant mitigation technique will be discussed and it is expected that some recommendations to the ECC will be provided from the TG3 listing the pros and cons of the LDC. • Table F2.3.1 – current version of the ECC Decision on UWB emission limits, EIRP in dBm/MHz – subject to refinements in April 2006 Slide

20. F2.3 Applicable European rules  to be updated in April 2006 in Annex F(informative): IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.4a regulatory requirements • Note 1: In the frequency band 3.1 to 4.8 GHz, ECC has decided to investigate efficient mitigation techniques, such amongst others DAA (Detect And Avoid) mechanisms in order to ensure compatibility of UWB devices with radio services in the band with a view of allowing UWB devices in this band with maximum mean e.i.r.p. density of –41.3 dBm/MHz and a maximum peak e.i.r.p. density of 0dBm/50MHz. Duty-cycle limitation has also been identified as a possible mitigation technique. ECC will review this decision in the light of the results of these investigations. • [Note for public consultation: Technical requirements for the Low Duty Cycle (LDC) mitigation may be solved before the final adoption of the Decision and therefore be incorporated as a separate note to the table of this Annex.] Slide

21. F2.4 Applicable Japanese rules (To be updated in March 2006)inAnnex F(informative): IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.4a regulatory requirements • In Japan, a preliminary spectrum mask for indoor UWB was developed as a starting point for further studies and discussions on Japanese UWB regulation.This preliminary mask is shown in Figure F.2.4.1. • This preliminary mask isdeveloped to accelerate the completion of the Japanese UWB regulation by the Telecommunication Council of Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC).Necessary adjustments to this preliminary UWB spectrum mask will be made by referring to the new study and discussion results. • Figure F.2.4.1 Japanese preliminary mask (only indoor use). Slide

22. F2.4 Applicable Japanese rules (To be updated in March 2006)inAnnex F(informative): IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.4a regulatory requirements • Notes: • 1) This preliminary mask is used under the condition that all UWB devices are limited to only indoor use. • 2) For 3.400-4.8 GHz band (dotted area), the emission level of UWB devices must be equal to or less than –41.3 dBm/MHz as that of the FCC rule when UWB devices are equipped with interference avoidance techniques such as Detect And Avoid (DAA). This is to protect systems of beyond IMT-2000, ENG, and other radiocommunication services, effectively. The emission level for UWB devices without interference avoidance techniques must be equal to or less than –70 dBm/MHz. • 3) For 4.8-7.25 GHz band, the emission level of UWB devices must be equal to or less than –70 dBm/MHz. • 4) For 7.250-10.25 GHz (hatched area by oblique line), the emission level of UWB devices must be equal to or less –41.3 dBm/MHz as the FCC rule. • 5) For frequency band below 3.4 GHz, the emission level of UWB devices must be equal to or less than the transmission mask as defined in Table F.2.3.1. • 6) For frequency band beyond 10.25 GHz, the emission level of UWB devices must be equal to or less than –70 dBm/MHz. Slide

23. Backup slides Slide

24. Suggested minor modification in specification:(Doc:802.15-05-0570-02-004a) • Band plan: 3-5GHz with DAA, 6-10GHz without DAA • Modulation: Sequence, PRF, Pulse Shape, FEC • MAC: Carrier and Energy Sensing for other radios • Ranging: interference from coexisting radios • CSS: compliance in 2.4GHz band • Extra Functions: DAA Slide

25. Suggested minor modification in specification (1/2) • Band plan: 3-5GHz with DAA, 6-10GHz without DAA • 6-10GHz should be involved as well as 3-5GHz. • Common subbands allocation for European and Japanese masks as well as FCC’s one. • Modulation: Sequence, Pulse Shape, PRF, FEC • To shape UWB signal spectrum for avoiding interference to victim radios, e.g. 4G, sequence and pulse shape can be designed to make notches in spectral shape. PRF should be also high enough for low interference. • To protect UWB devices against interference from strong coexisting radios, e.g. 4G, FEC should be designed with enough error-correcting capability so as to match with error features like error burst statistics. Super-orthogonal convolutional (SOC) codes with low encoding and decoding complexity and others are suggested. Slide

26. Suggested minor modification in specification (2/2) • MAC: carrier and energy sensing other radios as well • To achieve DAA adaptively, we need to sense a victim radio’s signal like cognitive radio concept. • DAA may need modification of MAC as well as PHY. CBP (Contention-Base Protocol) requested by FCC could be introduced to 4a as well. • Ranging: interference from coexisting radios • Investigate ranging performance degradation due to interference from coexisting radios. • Make ranging more secure and robust against jamming and the interference. • CSS: compliance in 2.4GHz band • Extra Functions: DAA Slide

27. Feasible Implementation of DAA for IEEE802.15.4a Adaptive interference avoiding techniques by SSA Soft-Spectrum Adaptation (SSA) Adaptive band eliminating filter • Analog Implementation • Digital Implementation or hybrid Adapative pulse shaping • Pulse shaping by high-speed DAC • Pulse shaping by combining an wavelet • Ref. Modified pulse shapes based on SSA for interference mitigation and systems coexistence (update), Doc: IEEE 802.15-03-0457-00-003a Adaptive spreading sequence • Spectrum null coding • Ref. Alternative Spreading Code and Channel Code for IEEE802.15.4a, Doc: IEEE 802.15-05-0462-01-004a Slide