1 / 64

IMT-Advanced Status Report

Name. Company. Address. Phone. email. bkraemer@. marvell. .com. Bruce Kraemer. Marvell. 5488 Marvell Ln. +1. -. 321. -. 4. 27. -. Santa Clara, CA. 4098. 95054. dengwer@nortel.com. Darwin Engwer. Nortel. 4655 Great America. +1. -. 408. -. 495. -. Networks.

olivia-russo
Download Presentation

IMT-Advanced Status Report

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. Name Company Address Phone email bkraemer@ marvell .com Bruce Kraemer Marvell 5488 Marvell Ln +1 - 321 - 4 27 - Santa Clara, CA 4098 95054 dengwer@nortel.com Darwin Engwer Nortel 4655 Great America +1 - 408 - 495 - Networks Pkwy, Santa Clara 2588 CA 95054 IMT-Advanced Status Report Authors: Date: 2007-11-12 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  2. Admin Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  3. Attendance • http://newton • Register • Indicate attendance • See document 11-07-2159r1 and 07-0767r1 for more details Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  4. 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 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  5. 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 read Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  6. 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 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  7. 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 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  8. 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 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  9. Technical Discussion Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  10. IMT AHC Basic Objectives • Provide status information regarding ITU plans to 802.11 • In cooperation with other 802 WGs, encourage participation in the creation of output documents to ITU • For more details see also prior reports: • IMT Advanced Report 11-07-2140r4 • IMT Advanced Report 11-07-2500r0 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  11. Short History • ITU-R WP8F has an initiative underway to identify air interfaces for inclusion in IMT-Advanced • Question ITU-R 229/8 then M.1645 “Framework and overall objectivesof the future development of IMT‑2000 and systems beyond IMT‑2000” • Nomadic/ local area class targets 1 Gbps with low mobility! • IMT-Advanced Technical Requirements are nearly complete • Spectrum –requested in WRC07 Agenda Item 1.4 (22 Oct – 16 Nov) • Technical (radio) requirements only other unfinished work item • ITU-R Circular letter soliciting solutions due out March 2008 • Commercial deployment of IMT-Advanced expected around 2012 • IEEE 802 submitted suggestions on IMT Tech to WP8F (mid May) • Contributions included from .11, .16, .18, .19, .20, .21 • WP8F review in Kyoto (end of May) • IEEE 802 held additional teleconferences bewtween Sep & Nov and submitted additional suggestions on IMT Tech to WG18 Oct 29. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  12. Work continues in WP8F WP5D • ITU-R is restructuring its project activities • All IMT activities are to be undertaken by WP5D • IMT • IMT-Advanced • The final draft from this WP5D correspondence group will form the basis of the report from this group into 23rd meeting of WP8F in January 28 in Geneva which will generate the circular letter (Invitation to submit technical proposals). • A schedule of ITU meetings can be found at • http://www.itu.int/events/upcomingevents.asp?lang=en&sector=ITU-R Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  13. Update on ITU-R Activities • RA approved the update of ITU-R Rec. M.1457 • Defines ITM-2000 “family” of technologies • That family now includes 802.16e • RA adopted new naming convention for 3G/4G mobile • The name “IMT” is an umbrella that includes • IMT-2000 – 3G (technologies contained in M.1457) • IMT-Advanced – 4G (technology/technologies not yet defined) • Spectrum identified by a WRC will be for IMT • Can be used by all IMT technologies Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  14. Update on ITU-R Activities • The new SG is of interest to IEEE 802 • Combined SG8 (Mobile Services) and SG9 (Fixed Services) as SG5 (Terrestrial Services) • SG 5 has 4 proposed/interim WPs • WP5A – Land mobile excluding IMT • WP5B – Maritime and Aeronautical Mobile, Radiolocation • WP5C – Fixed services including HF • WP5D – Land mobile (IMT) • Proposed meeting schedule for January/February 2008 is retained for now • WP5D will meet in Geneva starting 28 January • SG5 meets 19 – 20 February to decide final meeting dates and chairs Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  15. Update on ITU-R Activities • WRC-07 is still meeting • More than 3000 delegates registered • More than 140 administrations represented • Considering identification of additional frequency bands for IMT • 450 – 470 MHz • Portions of 470 – 806/862 MHz • 2300 – 2400 MHz • 3400 – 4200 MHz • As of 11 November nothing yet agreed Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  16. Plans from Sep to Jan 08 • WP8F meeting starts Jan 28, ’08 in Geneva • Submissions must be received by Jan 14, ’08 • Outgoing documents require approval of WG18 & EC • Submission to WG & EC for approval by Dec 21, ’07 • Circulate submission in WG11 for approval Dec 3-21, ’07 • Agree on contents in IMT-AHC on Nov 30 for distribution to WG11 for formal approval • Review response contents in Plenary Nov 12-16, ’07 • Conduct email & teleconference preparation & review of responses Sep 28-Nov 9, ’07 • Kick off response process during WG11/WG18 interim Sep 18-21, ’07 • Allocate work assignments Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  17. November Session Goals WG11 • Finalize WG 11 suggested changes to IMT.TECH • Finalize WG 11 suggested changes to IMT.EVAL • Accept/Negotiate suggested changes from other WGs • WG11 approval of output document to ITU (Friday) 802 • ExCom approval of output document to ITU (Friday) Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  18. November Session Meetings • WG11 • IMT-Adv 4:00 – 6:00 Tues & Wed (Courtland) • IMT-Advanced discussion among 802 WGs • Hosted by WG18 • Tuesday - Thursday from 13:30 to 18:00 - Greenbriar • Updated report to 802.11 WG plenary on Friday • Goal: ExCom approval of output document Friday evening Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  19. Document References • The document submitted to ITU-R WP8F was, as requested by WP8F, a markup of the WP8F template • http://ieee802.org/18/Meeting_documents/2007_Mar/18-07-0026-00-0000_PROPOSED_AMENDMENTS_TO%20%5bIMT.TECH%5dmarkup.doc • A second clean version was also produced that was easier to read • http://ieee802.org/18/Meeting_documents/2007_July/18-07-0026-00-0000_PROPOSED_AMENDMENTS_TO_%5bIMT.TECH%5d.doc • A summary of results of the Kyoto meeting has been posted: • http://ieee802.org/18/Meeting_documents/2007_July/18-07-0052-00-0000_802.18_Report_on_IMT_Advanced_WP8F_Input.ppt • Along with a more in depth report which will presented during the Tuesday evening 2007-07-17 meeting of 802.18: • http://ieee802.org/18/Meeting_documents/2007_July/18-07-0049-00-0000_IMT-Advanced_Technical_Requirements.ppt Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  20. WG 18 Document References – Nov ‘07 • The latest version of the composite 802 versions of the documents are stored in the WG18 server • Index of /18/Meeting_documents/2007_Nov • 04-Nov-2007 08:50 18-07-0083-00-0000_IMT-Advanced_Reqrmnt_2_d1.doc • 05-Nov-2007 20:44 18-07-0084-00_IMT-Advanced_Eval_d0.doc • 05-Nov-2007 20:44 18-07-0085-02-0000 Draft_RR-TAG_Agenda_Nov07.xls • 12-Nov-2007 11:17 18-07-0086-00-0000_Update_ on_ 802.18_IMT_Advanced.ppt • 12-Nov-2007 7:09 18-07-0087-00-0000_Update_ on ITU-R Activities.ppt • 14-Nov-2007 10:25 18-07-0097d0_ITU-R_WP-5_Proposed_Org.doc Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  21. IMT Document References – • Conference Call Material - Sep - November ‘07 • Nov 09 11-07-2774 Minutes • Nov 02 11-07-2709r1 Minutes • Oct 26 11-07-2680r1 Agenda + 2692r2 Minutes • Oct 19 11-07-2654 Minutes • Oct 12 11-07-2644 Minutes • Oct 05 11-07-2633 Minutes • Sep 28 11-07-2620 Minutes Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  22. IMT.TECH • Summary of actions from last week and response from WG18. • No additional change proposals for IMT.TECH at this time. • IMT.EVAL • Continuation of review of contents and targets for change. • Focus on path loss and channel models proposed by WP8F • Analysis of IMT.EVAL has not been completed. No suggestions at this time. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  23. WG11 • IMT-Adv 4:00 – 6:00 Tues & Wed (Courtland) • WG18 plans • Monday 3-3:30 pm Overview of IMT documents (Greenbriar) • Tuesday 7:30 – 9:30 IMT-Adv (Room TBD) • Thursday 7:00 – 9:30 IMT-Adv (Room TBD) • WG16 plans • ITU liaison group Wed 8am 6pm (Singapore) • 16m evaluation document 16-0037r1 (155p) reuses proposed path loss & channel models from IMT.EVAL • L82016-07_61 notification of intent to submit proposal to ITU-R Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  24. Key Topics 802.11 • Spectrum Topic (Agenda Item 1.4) in WRC-07 • Regional preferences summary requested • Portions of IMT.TECH considered relevant to 802.11 • Request that 802.11 evaluate further enhancements to frequency sharing • Provide further input to WG18 on IMT.TECH if needed 802 • WG18 intends to continue developing inputs to IMT.TECH • Request from 802.11 to generate input to IMT.EVAL • WG coordination plan going forward? • Need to see what additional activity is authorized by EC on Friday Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  25. Preliminary IMT.EVAL analysisPath Loss & Channel Model • Major change: • Mandates 8-element antenna array in the document for indoor. It should not be more than 4-elements. • Minor changes (possible): • Path loss model A1 looks fine. Heavy wall penetration should be maybe 10 dB instead of 12 dB, minor. • Path loss model A2 for NLOS has very low standard deviation of 1.1 dB. Not sure why. • Delay spread and angle of arrival models look ok. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  26. Technical Backup Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  27. IMT-Advanced Vision of Complementary Interconnected Access Systems Broadcast Systems Mobile Systems Local Area Systems Personal Area Systems Fixed Networks IMT-Advanced visualizes seamless inter-working and handover between access systems Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  28. IMT Advanced Framework Systems beyond IMT-2000 will encompass the capabilities of previous systems Mobility Mobility New capabilities of systems beyond High High New Mobile Access Enhanced Enhanced IMT IMT - - 2000 2000 Dashed line indicates that the exact data rates associated with systems beyond IMT-2000 are not yet determined IMT IMT - - 2000 2000 Enhancement Enhancement New Nomadic / Local Low Low Area Wireless Access 1 1 10 10 100 100 1000 1000 Peak useful data rate (Mbit/s) Interconnection Nomadic / Local Area Access Systems Digital Broadcast Systems Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  29. Circular Letter ITU-R WP8F plans to finalize all contents Jan 29, ‘08 Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  30. Action Item via Liaison Letter WORKING PARTY 8F Liaison statement to external organisations on minimum performance requirements and evaluation guidelines for IMT-Advanced Source: Document 8F/TEMP/578 WP 8F plans to issue an invitation to receive proposals for candidate Radio Interface Technologies (RIT) for IMT-Advanced in early 2008. A part of this invitation will contain the “Requirements Related to Technical System Performance” [IMT.TECH] while another part will contain the “Guidelines for Evaluation” [IMT.EVAL] of candidate RITs for IMT-Advanced. These draft documents are attached electronically for your review. WP 8F would appreciate receiving your comments and feedback in time for its next meeting in January 2008. WP 8F plans to continue discussing the technical system performance requirements as well as the guidelines for evaluation at its next meeting. WP 8F looks forward to receiving the requested information and/or comments from external organisations and on-going co-operation. Contact: Mr. SUN LixinE-mail: sunlixin@huawei.com 73 p 38 p Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  31. Attachment 6.7 Source: Document 8F/TEMP/568 Working document towards proposed draft new [Report/Recommendation] [Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-Advanced] [Editors note: a new section on terminology is necessary for [IMT.EVAL].] CONTENTS 1 Introduction 2 Scope 3 Structure of the Recommendation/Report 4 Related documents 5 Radio interface technology considerations 6Technical characteristics chosen for evaluation 7Selected test environments and deployment models for evaluation 8Guidelinesfor evaluating the radio interface technologies by independent evaluation groups 9 Evaluation methodology 10 Detailed evaluation approach Annex 1 – Radio interface technologies description template Annex 2 – Test environments and deployment models Annex 3 – Requirements for assessment of candidate technologies Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  32. Attachment 6.8 Source: Document 8F/TEMP/574 DRAFT [Report on] Requirements related to technical system performance for IMT-Advanced Radio interface(s) [IMT.TECH] TABLE OF CONTENTS 1Introduction 2Scope and Purpose 3Related Documents 4Minimum Requirements 4.1Cell spectral efficiency 4.2 Peak data rate 4.3 Cell edge user throughput 4.4 Latency 4.5 Mobility 4.6 Handover 5Technological Items Required To Describe Candidate Air Interface 5.1Multiple Access Methods 5.2Modulation SchemeError control coding schemePhysical Channel Structure and MultiplexingFrame StructureSpectrum CapabilitiesSupport Of Advanced Antenna CapabilitiesLink Adaptation and Power ControlRF Channel Parameters[Scheduling Algorithm]Radio Interface Architecture and Protocol StackPositioningSupport of multicast and broadcastQoS Support and ManagementSecuirty AspectsNetwork TopologyMobility Management and RRMInterference Mitigation Within Radio InterfaceSynchronisationPower efficiency 6Required technology criteria for evaluationMinimum Requirement ParametersOther Parameters for Evaluation 7Conclusions 8Terminology, abbreviations Appendices 1Overview of major new technologies 2Application of multi-input multi-output technology in IMT-Advanced System 3Input text to 22nd meeting of WP8F on general requirements Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  33. Points to Consider • The evaluation process is likely to be more important to 802.11 than IMT.Tech. A couple of key points to consider in the eval process are: • More flexibility for upstream and downstream modulation types • Area efficiency, for example, b/Hz/joule/m^2 is a possible metric Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  34. Authorized IMT conference calls • IMT-AHC • Fridays • Weekly • 12:00 (noon) ET Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  35. Documents to be Developed in 802.16m TGm • • TGm should develop the following documents as part of 802.16m standardization process: • – Usage Models/Deployment Scenarios & System Requirements • • A set of possible deployment scenarios and applications of the 802.16m standard. • • A set of performance targets and features that 802.16m compliant systems shall meet or exceed. • – Evaluation Methodology • • A complete set of parameters, models, and methodologies for the link-level and system-level simulations that allow fair evaluation/comparison of various technical proposals. • • Channels Models: A set of spatial channel model parameters are specified to characterize particular features of MIMO radio channels to be used for simulating technical proposals for the future 802.16m standard. • – System Description Document (SDD) • • Architecture and design of the 802.16m air interface amendment • • Captures the core technical concepts behind the features included in the amendment • • Will enable analysis and/or simulations for characterizing the coarse level performance benefits of the air interface in association with the Evaluation Methodology • – 802.16m amendment • – 802.16 IMT-Advanced Proposal Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  36. 802.16 TGm Timeline Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  37. Wednesday - Session II Focus on Document Revisions Proposals for Submission to WP5D Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  38. First Group Changes Full details captured in Oct 26 11-07-2680r1 Agenda + 11-07-2692r2 Minutes Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  39. 4.1 Cell Spectral Efficiency 802.11 Submitted text Assuming the Test Environments described in the IMT.EVAL working document, Doc. 8F/1170, Attachment 6.3. Note: this table only applies to nomadic, TDD systems Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  40. 4.1 Cell Spectral Efficiency 802.11 Submitted text Why? Why? Assuming the Test Environments described in the IMT.EVAL working document, Doc. 8F/1170, Attachment 6.3. Note: this table only applies to nomadic, TDD systems Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  41. 4.1 Cell Spectral Efficiency 802.11 edited text Assuming the Test Environments described in the IMT.EVAL working document, Doc. 8F/1170, Attachment 6.3. Note: this table only applies to nomadic, TDD systems Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  42. 4.1 Cell Spectral Efficiency 802.11 Submitted text "New mobile access systems can be targeted to cover large cell ranges with high mobility and lower peak data rates, while new nomadic local area wireless access systems should be targeted to cover small cell ranges with low or no-mobility and high data rates. Each of the new systems can not be required to satisfy both requirements." Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  43. 4.2 Peak Spectral Efficiency 802.11 Submitted text Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  44. Text conflict in Section 4.2 2 streams of 20 MHz assumption = 7.2 max (144/20) . Would prefer separate table for nomadic rather than hard 8.b/s/Hz limit. Concerned that range of 7-8 will be converted to 8 by WP5D. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  45. 6.2.3 802.11 Submitted text 6.2.3 Cell Coverage * From 1283 (IEEE):[Support for larger cell sizes should notcompromise the performance of smaller cells. Specifically, IMT-Advanced systems shall support the deployment scenarios in Table 10 in terms of maximum cell range. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  46. Second Group Changes Full details captured in Nov 02 11-07-2709r1 Minutes Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  47. Cell Range 802.11 Submitted text • From 1268 (Korea): [A cell radius over 35 km should be supported by proper configuration of the system parameters. • The system should be flexible enough to support the various cell coverage scenarios that meet the performance target. To maintain the balance of the coverage, the cell coverage is considered to be the same between the downlink and the uplink. The performance requirements with respect to cell range are as followings: • Up to 5km: The specified performance requirements above must be achieved. • Up to 35km: Graceful degradation • Symmetrical coverage between uplink and downlink • And the performance requirements of the nomadic wireless access are as followings: • Up to 100m: The specified performance requirements above must be achieved. • Up to 500m: Graceful degradation.] • The text highlighted in green should be changed to the following in yellow: • Up to 30m indoors: The specified performance requirements above must be achieved. • Up to 100m: in pico cell environment with graceful degradation] Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  48. Korea Text 802.11 Submitted text • From 1268 (Korea): IMT-Advanced systems should support more than 100 Mbps in new mobile access environment and 1 Gbps in new nomadic/local area wireless access environment. For this, performance optimization can be done in either way. • 1) One system can be designed to meet both of the new mobile access and the nomadic/local area wireless access requirements together. • 2) Separate system can be designed for the new mobile access and the nomadic/local area wireless access requirements. • The IMT-Advanced systems should be designed to provide best-in-class performance attributes such as peak and sustained data rates and corresponding spectral efficiencies, capacity, latency, overall network complexity and quality-of-service management. • The IMT-Advanced systems should support applications that conform to open standards and protocols. The examples of applications are, but not limited to, video, full graphical web browsing, e-mail, file uploading and downloading without size limitations, streaming video and streaming audio, IP Multicast, Location based services, VPN connections, VoIP, instant messaging and on- line multiplayer gaming. • The IMT-Advanced systems should provide the mobile user with an "always-on" experience while also taking into account and providing features needed to preserve battery life. The connectivity from the mobile terminal to the base station should be automatic and transparent to the user as it moves between mobile networks. • 802.11 endorses the comments in this proposal with one exception. The text highlighted in green should be changed to the following in yellow: • IMT-Advanced systems should support more than 100 Mbps in new mobile access environments and up to approximately 1 Gbit/s in new nomadic/local area wireless access environment. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  49. Preliminary IMT.EVAL analysisPath Loss & Channel Model • Major change: • Mandates 8-element antenna array in the document for indoor. It should not be more than 4-elements. • Minor changes (possible): • Path loss model A1 looks fine. Heavy wall penetration should be maybe 10 dB instead of 12 dB, minor. • Path loss model A2 for NLOS has very low standard deviation of 1.1 dB. Not sure why. • Delay spread and angle of arrival models look ok. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

  50. Additional Changes • Changes: • Heavy wall penetration should be 10 dB instead of 12 dB. Bruce Kraemer (Marvell); Darwin Engwer(Nortel)

More Related