1 / 18

CUBE vs WECA Michael Dydyk

CUBE vs WECA Michael Dydyk. IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks. Agenda . Define CUBE and WECA Objective of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) Background Home RF Working Group Request Technical Claims of the Proposal Issues Against the Proposal

nusa
Download Presentation

CUBE vs WECA Michael Dydyk

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. CUBE vs WECA Michael Dydyk IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  2. Agenda • Define CUBE and WECA • Objective of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) • Background • Home RF Working Group Request • Technical Claims of the Proposal • Issues Against the Proposal • Current Status of the NPRM Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  3. CUBE • Committee for Unlicensed Broadband Enablement • Intel • Microlor • Motorola • Proxim • Siements Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  4. WECA • Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance • 3Com Corporation • Aironet Wireless Communications, Inc. • Alantro Communications, Inc. • Apple Computer Inc. • Cisco Systems, Inc. • Dell Computer Corporation Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  5. WECA (Cont.) • Intermec Technologies • Intersil Corporation • Lucent Technologies, Inc. • No Wires Needed, Inc. • Nokia, Inc. • Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co. LTD • ShareWave, Inc. • Symbol Technologies, Inc. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  6. WECA (Cont.) • Wayport, Inc. • Zoom Telephonics, Inc. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  7. Objectives of NPRM • Amend the Part 15 rules regarding the operation of non-licensed spread spectrum systems. • Specifically, this Notice proposes to revise the rules for frequency hopping systems to allow for wider operational bandwidths. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  8. Background • FCC permits operation of non-licensed radio frequency (RF) devices on a non-interference basis. • Such devices must not cause interference to authorized services and they must accept any interference received from such services. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  9. Background (Cont.) • FCC permits operation of frequency hopping and direct sequence spread spectrum systems. • Spread Spectrum systems reduce the probability of causing interference to other signals occupying same spectrum Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  10. Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum Systems • Output power 30 dBm (1.0 watt) • Hopping channels 75 • 20 dB channel bandwidth 1 MHz • Time of occupancy <.4 sec within a 30 second period Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  11. HomeRF Working Group Request-01 • Power output 25 dBm • Hopping channels 75 • 20 dB channel bandwidth 3 MHz • Time of occupancy .05 sec/hop within a 30 sec period Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  12. HomeRF Working Group Request-02 • Power output 23 dBm • Hopping channels 75 • 20 dB channel bandwidth 5 MHz • Time of occupancy .02 sec/hop within a 30 sec period Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  13. Technical Claims of the Proposal • Home RF Working Group (HRFWG) and now CUBE, claim that the proposal will not cause additional interference. • Overlapping channels will be needed to accommodate 75 hops. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  14. Technical Claims of the Proposal (Cont.) • The average time of occupancy on any one frequency will increase. • The proposed reduction in output power and time of occupancy would offset any potential increase in interference. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  15. Issues Against the Proposal • WECA argues that the changes will cause increased interference to Part 15 direct sequence spread spectrum systems. • WECA argues that the proposed systems will not be able to achieve substantially higher data rates that current 1 MHz systems because of the affects of in-building multipath interference. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  16. Issues Against the Proposal (Cont.) • The power reductions proposed by HomeRF are inadequate to ensure that other users of the band will not encounter increased levels of interference. • Increasing hop rate does not reduce interference to other Part 15 users. • Increasing hop rate reduces throughput for FHSS systems. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  17. Issues Against the Proposal (Cont.) • The preservation of at least 75 channels will result in a high degree of overlap for both the 3 and 5 MHz channels. The use of overlapping channels results in a level of interference which is even higher than co-channel interference. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

  18. Current Status of the NPRM • WECA and CUBE have submitted rebuttals (2 for WECA and 1 for CUBE) each claiming the other is wrong. • Silicon Wave (member of the Bluetooth SIG and HomeRF Working Group) has conducted an independent simulation and measurements on the issues and their results confirm the WECA position. Michael Dydyk, Motorola

More Related