1 / 9

802.22 Response to Comments received on the proposed 802.22a PAR and 5C

802.22 Response to Comments received on the proposed 802.22a PAR and 5C. Date: 2011-07-20. Authors:. From 802.11. 2.1 Title: What is the real work that is being cited in the title?

tmattingly
Download Presentation

802.22 Response to Comments received on the proposed 802.22a PAR and 5C

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. 802.22 Response to Comments received on the proposed 802.22a PAR and 5C Date: 2011-07-20 Authors: Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  2. From 802.11 • 2.1 Title: • What is the real work that is being cited in the title? • This PAR is for enhancing the interface and procedure for management and control plane as well as for defining the management component using the ASN1 standard. • Title is changed to include “Enhancement of the …” • 5.2 Scope: • suggest the following for your Scope:This amendment defines new Management and Control Plan interfaces for the IEEE 802.22 standard.  The existing Management Information Base (MIB) is enhanced to accommodate the new interfaces. The Primitives for Cognitive Radio Capabilities have been extended to align with the new interface definitions. • Agree to remove the first sentence, full title does not need to be repeated. • References to specific Clause numbers are removed. • Agree to remove the 4th sentence. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  3. From 802.11 • 5.3 Other Standard: • Should be yes: “PAWS” or similar database protocol standard. • We don’t agree that the implementation of these amendments depend on the completion of another standard. It should stay as: No. • What is contained in the 802.22 Standard is a set of primitives needed to access the database. This proposed PAR will bring, among other things, amendments to the MIB and management and control plane interface that will involve these primitives but will not deal with the higher layer encapsulating of this information to access the database over the Internet. Therefore, this effort is independent of any standardization process on this higher layer interface protocol. • 5.4 Purpose • The scope and purpose should describe the final document not the project. If you do not include a purpose statement in the Amendment it is better to write “Document will not have a purpose statement”. • We don’t agree that the scope and purpose should have the same purpose. Our interpretation is that the scope should give an indication of the extent of the proposed amendments while the purpose should explain the reason for doing it. The text in section 5.4 was written according to this understanding. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  4. From 802.11 • 5.5 Need: • The statement should be more succinct and focused. • Agreed. Modified text is being proposed. • 5.6 Stakeholders – • Who are the stakeholders, not just lists of industry descriptions. • List who has stake in 802.22 not who 802.22 is looking to include. • The list has been changed to include the same stakeholders as those in the main 802.22 PAR. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  5. From 802.11 • 8.1 note: • you need to include the item number that you are commenting on. ("Item Number and Explanation").This is a better Scope statement that what is in 5.2. • The gist of this note has been included in the Purpose section and the note has been removed. • General: Please check the instructions for PARs again, and comply with the instructions. • See Web page for PAR submission. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  6. From 802.11 • Five Criteria is not numbered… • 1. Broad Market Potential • a) What does this have to do with the scope of the proposed project? • Same text as used for the main Standard should be used here. • a) Live-stock monitoring may need a MIB, but Live-Stock Monitoring applications are probably not the motivation for enhancing the 802.22 MIB. Rewrite Market Potential. • Agreed, the list of application can be removed. • 3. Distinct Identity: • c) The proposed title, scope and purpose were not defined to make it easy for anyone to select this standard for relevant applications. • There is no other equivalent project since the results of this project will end up as amendments to the main 802.22 standard which will be integrated through a future maintenance PAR to the main Standard. There is no need for “distinct identity” for these amendments. Thus, the current text needs to be changed to: “Not-Applicable for an amendment PAR”. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  7. From 802.19 • In the Need section of the PAR the phrase “purposed-designed” is awkward.  Please use a clearer term. • The text in Section 8.1 of the PAR is included earlier in the Need section, please remove the second occurrence of this text. • In the Section 1a of the 5C it mentions use for disaster recovery and homeland security; however, TV white space availability is intermittent.  It does not seem like TV white space should be used for these mission critical applications. Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  8. From 802.19 • In the Technical Feasibility section of the 5C please state whether the WG will produce a CA document. • In the Compatibility section of the 5C please include text as to how 802.22a will enhance compatibility with the upcoming 802.19.1 standard. • Text proposed by 802.19:  "802.22a shall contain the required elements to interface to the 802.19.1 system." Gerald Chouinard, CRC

  9. References Gerald Chouinard, CRC

More Related