1 / 10

IEEE 802.20 Evaluation Criteria Update: Progress and Challenges

This document provides an update on the evaluation criteria for IEEE 802.20, discussing sectorization, spectral efficiency, mobility modeling, higher layer protocols, control signaling, fairness criteria, and performance metrics. It highlights recommendations and consensus reached on various aspects, including the need for mobility models and higher layer protocol modeling. The document emphasizes the importance of input from various groups to finalize performance metrics and protocol details.

tjill
Download Presentation

IEEE 802.20 Evaluation Criteria Update: Progress and Challenges

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. IEEE C802.20-03/111

  2. Status of 802.20 Evaluation Criteria IEEE 802.20 Evaluation Criteria CG IEEE 802.20 Plenary Meeting November 10-13, 2003

  3. Evaluation Criteria Status • One conference call since the November Interim • Topics discussed over the conference call: • Sectorization, definition of spectral efficiency, mobility modeling, higher layers protocol models, control signaling models, fairness criteria and performance metrics etc. • Initial consensus reached on the Fairness criteria. • Version 06 of the Evaluation criteria document available (C802.20-03/94).

  4. Sectorization andSpectral efficiency • Recommendation to use 3-sector baseline configuration. • Spectral efficiency quoted as b/s/Hz/sector • The simulation data can also be provided for other configurations such as omni-cells

  5. Mobility model • Mobility at the physical layer is taken care of by modeling fast fading corresponding to the mobile speed. • A mobility model is still needed to assess the performance of various handoff schemes.

  6. Higher Layer Protocols • Models for higher layer protocols such as HTTP, RTSP and RTP etc. as applicable for various applications.

  7. Control signaling modeling • Examples of control signaling are scheduling grants transmission, channel quality feedback, and ARQ ACK/NACK Feedback etc. • MAC states and signaling to enable state transitions modeled explicitly in the system simulations.

  8. Performance Metrics • List of performance metrics used in the evaluation is incomplete. • Input needed from the traffic modeling CG on the list of applications supported before the application specific performance metrics can be defined.

  9. New Issues • Simulation and evaluation of various channel bandwidths?

  10. Summary • Little progress due to lack of contributions • Input from the traffic models CG • Application specific performance metrics and higher layer protocols details cannot be finalized until the details on the traffic models are available. • Input from the requirements CG : • Great level of detail and specification in the SRD would help simplify the evaluation criteria task.

More Related