1 / 23

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [ Channel Assignment in 2.4GHz and 868MHz Band ] Date Submitted: [ December 13, 2010 ] Last Revision: [January 3, 2011] Source: [ Khurram Waheed ] Company [ Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. ]

thane-garrison
Download Presentation

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

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. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Channel Assignment in 2.4GHz and 868MHz Band] Date Submitted: [December 13, 2010] Last Revision: [January 3, 2011] Source: [Khurram Waheed] Company [Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.] Address [USA] E-Mail:[khurram.waheed@freescale.com] Re: [Supporting IEEE 802.15.4g LB59 Comment Resolution CID’s 34, 569, 570, 649, 650, 651] Abstract: [This spreadsheet reviews the proposed channel assignment in Draft 2 of the IEEE 802.15.4g draft standard and proposes ways to differentiate the assignment in US and the rest of the world for the 2.4GHz Band. ] Purpose: [Supporting Draft 2 Comment Resolution. CID’s 34, 569, 570, 649, 650, 651] 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. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  2. GH requirement in 2.4 GHz Channel for US and the rest of the world Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  3. Executive Summary This document studies the regulatory requirements pertaining to the 2.4 GHz (2400 – 2483.5 MHz) band and also looks carefully at how the channel assignment has been done in IEEE 802.11 and IEEE 802.15.4-2006 standards • FCC 47 CFR §15.205 (in US) places a stringent requirement (i.e., -41.2 dBm/MHz) on the emission level in 2483.5 – 2500 MHz spectrum • Channelization of the complete band in US places impractical phase noise requirements for the radio specification • IEEE 802.11 (in US) takes care of this issue by not using (blacklisting) the highest two channels in the band. • This restriction does not apply outside of USA and as such the whole band can be used without any restriction. • This document proposes solutions regarding the allocation of 2.4GHz in US and rest of the world. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  4. Background(Excerpt from d2P802-15-4g_Draft_Standard.pdf) Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  5. 802.11 b/g Channel Assignment Reference: IEEE 802.11-2007 — Table 18-9 ^A Earlier, in Spain the only allowable channels were 10-11, and in France 10-13. These restrictions have been removed since, and these countries are currently following the common European policy (channels 1-13). ^BIn the USA, 802.11 operation in the channels 12 and 13 is actually allowed under low powered conditions. The 2.4 GHz Part 15 band in the US allows spread-spectrum operation as long as the 50-dB bandwidth of the signal is within in the range of 2400-2483.5 MHz[8]which wholly encompasses both channels 12 and 13. A Federal Communications Commission (FCC) document clarifies that only channel 14 is forbidden and furthermore low-power transmitters with low-gain antennas may legally operate in channels 12 and 13.[9]However, channels 12 and 13 are not normally used in order to avoid any potential interference in the adjacent restricted frequency band, 2483.5-2500 MHz[10], which is subject to strict emission limits set out in 47 CFR §15.205[11]. In Canada, 12 channels are available for use, 11 of which at full power and channel 12's transmit power limited. However, few devices have a method to enable a lower powered channel 12. ^C Channel 14 is valid only for DSSS and CCK modes (Clause 18 a.k.a.802.11b) in Japan. OFDM (i.e. 802.11g) may not be used. (IEEE 802.11-2007 §19.4.2) Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  6. Excerpt from FCC 47 CFR §15.205 Except as shown in paragraph (d) of this section, only spurious emissions are permitted in any of the frequency bands listed below: (b) Except as provided in paragraphs(d) and (e) of this section, the field strength of emissions appearing within these frequency bands shall not exceed the limits shown in § 15.209. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  7. Excerpt from FCC 47 CFR §15.209 § 15.209 Radiated emission limits; general requirements. (a) Except as provided elsewhere in this subpart, the emissions from an intentional radiator shall not exceed the field strength levels specified in the following table: This is equivalent to -41.2 dBm/MHz in 2483.5 – 2500 MHz band (see backup slides) Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  8. Channel Assignment in IEEE 802.15.4-2006 • 5 MHz wide channels • Using a formulas as specified in IEEE 802.15.4g/D2, this Implies • GL = 2.5MHz • GH = 1.0 MHz • Note, the complete band is channelized irrespective of the FCC regulation. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  9. Proposed Option 1: Location agnostic channelization (preferred) • Remove the text “For 2.4GHz, GH is 5MHz”. • Channelize the complete 2.4GHz band, resulting in a higher number of possible channels • Define one set of GL, GH, parameters for each 2.4GHz PHY combination (for details, please refer to P1802.15.4g/D2 or 10/955r0) • Blacklist the additional channels in US, by adding a statement in the standard and referring to FCC regulations, i.e., Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  10. Table for Proposed Option 1 Current Proposed Proposed text (to be added) “Due to strict FCC regulations, no channel using spectrum within 5MHz of the 2483.5 MHz band edge will be used in the USA” OR “For the 2400-2483.5 ISM band, SUN implementations in the USA will not use a channel that encompasses spectral frequencies higher than 2478.5 MHz to avoid violation of FCC regulations” See Slide 18 for the agreed text to be added Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  11. Proposed Option 2: Location aware channelization • Remove the text “For 2.4GHz, GH is 5MHz”. • Channelize the 2.4GHz band separately for US and the rest of the world • This would result in a different number of allocateable channels in the 2.4GHz band for US and the rest of the world • Define two separate sets of GL, GH, parameters for each 2.4GHz PHY combination (for details, please refer to P1802.15.4g/D2 or 10/955r0) Option 1 was chosen Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  12. Table for Proposed Option 2 USA Rest of the World * Need to discuss USA allocation for 2.4GHz OQPSK in USA, if applicable Option 1 was chosen Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  13. Exclusive sub-bands in 868-870 MHz Channel Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  14. Background (Comment by Michael Schmidt) Just a few comments with regard to the following documents:* DCN 957For 868-870 MHz (using SUN PHYs other than MR-O-QPSK), the regulationaccording to ERC/REC 70-03 and EN300200 seem to be ignored.Here is the list of alarm channels (ERC/REC 70-03 a Annex 7 Alarms)a) 868.6-868.7 MHz 10 mW e.r.p. < 1.0 % duty cycle 25 kHzb) 869.250-869.300 MHz 10 mW e.r.p. < 0.1 % duty cycle 25 kHzc) 869.650-869.700 MHz 25 mW e.r.p. < 10 % duty cycle 25 kHzd) 869.200-869.250 MHz 10 mW e.r.p. < 0.1 % duty cycle 25 kHz Social Alarmse) 869.300-869.400 MHz 10 mW e.r.p. < 1.0 % duty cycle 25 kHzI recommend a table based description for center frequency assignmentwithin 868.0 MHz - 870.0 MHz, avoiding overlap with alarm channels. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  15. Executive Summary • The commenter has pointed out the existence of alarm channels in the 868-870 MHz band and proposed a table based approach • Steve Jillings pointed out that “ERC 70-03 is purely a recommendation, EN 300 220-1 is the instrument of law”. • However, EN 300-220-1 also defines these spectral exclusions in the band • This presentation proposes a channel assignment scheme and the accompanying text, which avoids conflicts with regulatory requirements. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  16. Excerpt from EN 300-220-1 ** Refer to table 5 in EN 300-220-1 for regulatory details on maximum radiated power, channel spacing and spectrum access. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  17. Excerpt from 10/957r0 • The frequency band 868-870 MHz is already excluded from channel assignment using a formula • Resolution: Reject; No change required. The section would continue to use a table with 3 entries (Table 3a in IEEE P802.15.4g/D2) for this band • To cover the issue of overlapping alarm channels in 863-870 MHz band; see slide 18 for the agreed text to be added to the draft from IEEE P802.15.4g/D2 Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  18. Clarification for Other PHYs in 863-870 MHz Band • As per the standard, 868-870 MHz is intended only for MR-OQPSK, for which Table 3a specifies the specific center frequencies while avoiding any alarm channels. • Spectrally, this band overlaps with the 863-870 MHz band, which supports MR-FSK and MR-OFDM modes. As suggested for the ISM 2.4GHz band in document 10/962r0, my proposal remains to be “region agnostic” and do a contiguous assignment of channels. • Blacklisting of channels is an implementation detail, which is region and implementation specific and it is best left for the network implementer to specify to a silicon/SW vendor, as needed. • To cover all the exceptions, we can just include one sentence at the end of section stating: “Wherever applicable, SUN allocated channels conflicting with local regulatory requirements should not be used” • Alternate Statement (adapted from James Gilb’ proposal): “The availability of SUN channels varies among different regulatory regions. A SUN implementer will need to reference the latest regulations applicable to a local region” • Do we need to include any informative text? Editor’s to use the proposed text with edits if needed. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  19. Backup Slides Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  20. Channel Numbering Comments • CID 34 • As written GL is not defined for the 2.4GHz band. • Proposed text: Add "and GL is ChanSpacing/2" after "5MHz" and before the period, • CID 569 • For uniformity, it is best to use the same terminology and the parameters for defining channel numbering for all PHYs • CID 570 • To avoid confusion, it is best to include a table of parameters such as BandEdge, GL, GH, Chan Spacing, etc. for all bands in this section • CID 649 • Specifying the GL and GH parameters in text is clumsy. • Proposed: Use a table for the GL and GH values for each band. • CID 650 • GL and GH need to be specified for the dedicated use bands to arrive at the proper first channel center frequency. • CID 651 • The numbering scheme assumes channel width and channel spacing are the same, but they need not be; this might complicate future standard amendments if the numbering scheme has to change again. It would be better if the scheme were more flexible from the outset. The original 15.4 case of 2MHz channel with 5MHz spacing is one example. Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  21. Spurious Emission Limit (ITU-R Specification) Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  22. FCC Regulation Overview (1/2)Ref: ZigBee wireless networks and transceivers;  by Shahin Farahani Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

  23. FCC Regulation Overview (2/2)Ref: ZigBee wireless networks and transceivers;  by Shahin Farahani Khurram Waheed (Freescale)

More Related