Doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3 Submission July 2007 Eldad Perahia (Intel)Slide 1 Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report Notice: This document has been

July 2007

Eldad Perahia (Intel)

Slide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report

Notice: This document has been prepared to assist IEEE 802.11. 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 grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE 802.11.

Patent Policy and Procedures: The contributor is familiar with the IEEE 802 Patent Policy and Procedures <http:// ieee802.org/guides/bylaws/sb-bylaws.pdf>, including the statement "IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, provided the IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder or applicant with respect to patents essential for compliance with both mandatory and optional portions of the standard." Early disclosure to the Working Group of patent information that might be relevant to the standard is essential to reduce the possibility for delays in the development process and increase the likelihood that the draft publication will be approved for publication. Please notify the Chair <[email protected]> as early as possible, in written or electronic form, if patented technology (or technology under patent application) might be incorporated into a draft standard being developed within the IEEE 802.11 Working Group. If you have questions, contact the IEEE Patent Committee Administrator at <[email protected]>.

Date: 2007-07-10

Name Company Address Phone email

Eldad Perahia Intel [email protected]

Authors:

July 2007


Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Abstract

Coex Ad Hoc in July San Francisco agenda and report regarding comment resolution of LB97 (802.11n), including straw polls

July 2007


Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Overview

• Submissions

• Comment Resolution

• Latest version of spreadsheet: 07/0339r11

July 2007


Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

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

July 2007


Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

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.

IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards

2

July 2007


Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

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

July 2007


Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

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

July 2007


Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

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 [email protected] 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

July 2007


Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Further Information

• IEEE Code of Ethics– http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html

• IEEE-SA Affiliation FAQ– http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html

• IEEE-SA Antitrust & Competition Policy– http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf

• IEEE-SA LETTER OF ASSURANCE (LOA) FORM– http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/loa.pdf

• IEEE-SA STANDARDS BOARD PATENT COMMITTEE (PATCOM) INFORMATION– http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/index.html

• IEEE-SA PATENT FAQ– http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/faq.pdf

• IEEE 802 LAN / MAN STANDARDS COMMITTEE (LMSC) POLICIES & PROCEDURES– http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/policies-and-procedures.pdf

• IEEE 802.11 WLANS WORKING GROUP POLICIES & PROCEDURES– http://www.ieee802.org/11/DocFiles/06/11-06-0812-03-0000-802-11-policies-and-proceedures.htm

July 2007


Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Rules / Procedure

• As a general rule, we will NOT be reviewing CIDs on a one by one basis

• Resolution of comments will in most cases be based on submissions

• Coex Ad Hoc chair will bring resolutions which passed by 75% or more for motion in TGn, with affirmation of Ad Hoc

• Votes between 50% - 75% may be brought to TGn for further discussion and votes to break deadlock

July 2007


Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Subgroups (1/2)

• 40-20 in 2.4GHz– 243 comments– 9.20.4– Matt F.

• PCO– 31 comments– 11.16– Tomo

• L-SIG TXOP– 26 comments– 9.13.4, 9.13.5– Yuichi

• ECSA– Clause 7– 1 comment– Bjorn

• DFS & channel selection– 14 comments– 11.9.7, 11.9.8– Bjorn & Solomon & Matt F.

July 2007


Slide 12

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Subgroups (2/2)

• Channel switching– 36 comments– 9.20.4 (not include 2.4 GHz)– Solomon

• CCA sensing– 5 comments– 9.20.2, 9.20.3– Assaf

• 40/20– 24 comments– Miscellaneous 40/20 CIDs in 7.3.2.50, 9.20– Vinko

• Protection mechanisms– 69 comments– 7.3.2.50, 9.13– Bjorn

• DSSS-CCK– 9 comments– 11.15– Need new volunteer

July 2007


Slide 13

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Submissions Related to Comment Resolution

• Matt F.– 11-07-2020-04-000n-lb97-cid-2582-bss-width-switching.doc– 11-07-0614-07-000n-lb97-cid-75-20-40-coex.doc

• 11-07-2021-01-000n-lb97-20-40-coex-2-4ghz.ppt– 11-07-0591-07-000n-LB97-CID-1832-Operating-Mode-Bits.doc

• Vinko– 11-07-611

• Solomon– 11-07-2054-00-000n-tgn-lb97-coex-dfs-ch-sel.doc– 11-07-2055-00-000n-tgn-lb97-coex-ch-switching.doc

• Yuichi– Continuation of 11-07-734 (half done)

• Tomoko• Bjorn

– 07/2098r0: 5 remaining comments from 07/560r1 & EMR• Assaf• Richard

– 07/2100 (L-Length error)

Red indicates completedsubmissions

July 2007


Slide 14

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

EMRs

• CID 1737

• CID 43

July 2007


Slide 15

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Wed July 11 Agenda

• Submissions– 11-07-0591-07-000n-LB97-CID-1832-Operating-Mode-Bits.doc

– 11-07/0734r2

• EMR– CID 1737 to be handled by Yuichi as part of 07/734

July 2007


Slide 16

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Minutes for Wed July 11

• 11-07-0614-06-000n-lb97-cid-75-20-40-coex.doc– Set to 0: no non-HT STAs detected; Pure HT BSS (all are 20/40,

or BSS is 20)

– Set to 1: OBSS non-HT STA detected; all members of BSS are HT STAs

– Set to 2: no non-HT STAs detected; 20/40 BSS w/ 20 HT-STA members

– Set to 3: • There are members of BSS that are non-HT STA

July 2007


Slide 17

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

11-07-734r2

• CID 2250: in proposed resolution mention normative vs informative.• CID 2251: counter with “The TXOP holder should transmit a CF_End

frame in a basic rate non-HT PPDU starting a SIFS after the L-SIG TXOP protected period, except during the 40 MHz phase of PCO operation (see 11.16).”

• CID 2252: reject, context sensitive, different cases of CF-ED, A-MPDU vs L-SIG TXOP

• CID 3322: counter, align text (including timing requirement) with 9.13.6.2• CID 2254: proposed change wants reference RXVECTOR. Currently

there is no indication in RXVECTOR of a validity of L-SIG. Needs to be added to RXVECTOR, and the CID counter with modified resolution. Make as a separate submission.

• CID 2256: reassign to Protection Mechanism group• CID 2259: change resolution to: Counter, resolved by CID 1852 per text

in D2.04• Stopped at CID 2259

July 2007


Slide 18

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Thursday July 12 Agenda

• Submissions– 11-07-0614-07-000n-lb97-cid-75-20-40-coex.doc

• 11-07-2021-01-000n-lb97-20-40-coex-2-4ghz.ppt

July 2007


Slide 19

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Minutes for Thursday July 12

• 11-07-2021-01-000n-lb97-20-40-coex-2-4ghz.ppt– Overview of 07/614– Specific definitions moved from clause 3 to clause 9.20.1– New “public” action frame, force Class 1– Discussion of data scanning (versus beacon scanning)

• Data scanning allows for use of 40MHz if there is a legacy beacon but no data; beacon scanning is much more conservative in terms of not using 40MHz

• Data scanning covers potential overlap of STA with OBSS STA where beacons are not heard

• will have side discussion

– Discussion on active scan dwell time• Dwell time allows for receipt of multiple responses

July 2007


Slide 20

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

11-07-614r7

• Need to update resolutions in CID list

• No interest in individualized STA OBSS scanning per control of the AP

• Discussion on OBSS Scan RSSI Threshold – Need for threshold?

– Range of MIB?

– Intention was to ignore 1 or 2 Mbps beacons which have much further range than actual BSS

July 2007


Slide 21

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

11-07-614r7, continued

– Strawpoll• Do you support the inclusion of an RSSI Threshold for OBSS Scan operations?• Y:11• N:6• A:4

– Reasons for no vote• Too many thresholds• If detected should be reported, threshold can be abused• Threshold range is too wide

• In STA 19 definition, do we need restriction to 25 & 40 channel width? There are only 25 & 40 channel in 2.4 GHz in Annex J.

• Why 1 TU for the resolution for countdown timer?– Needs to be less than scan interval

• 40 MHz affected channel range equation– No objection to 25 MHz span on either side; allows 40 on channel 1&5 and legacy

on 9,10,or 11

July 2007


Slide 22

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

11-07-614r7, continued

• MIB attributes– Scan interval (dot11BSSWidthTriggerScanInterval)

• Maximum of 60 min, default of 30 min in r7• Change maximum value to 30 min• Change default value to 3 min (straw poll between 3min and 5min, 8 for 3min,

1 for 5min)

– dot11BSSWidthChannelTransitionDelayFactor• Changed min to 5• Changed default 5

– dot11OBSSScanActivityThreshold• strawpoll

– 5%: 5– 3%: 6

• Lots of debate on the percentage, not resolved

July 2007


Slide 23

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Friday July 13 Agenda

• 07/2110r1 (L-Length error)

• 11-07-0591-07-000n-LB97-CID-1832-Operating-Mode-Bits.doc

• 11-07-734r3

July 2007


Slide 24

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

07/2110

• L-Length fixed (and CID 402 resolved) by 07/2110 with no objections

• No objections to bringing to motion

July 2007


Slide 25

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

07-0591r8

• No objections to resolve CIDs

• No objections to bringing to motion

July 2007


Slide 26

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

11-07-734• Grey: deferred from Montreal

– New resolution is the upper text• Blue: agreed on resolution on Wed• Pink: modified resolution• No objection to new resolutions for CID 39, 2250, 2252, 3322, 2256, 2259 (in red

font)• 2251

– New Resolution: Counter w/ “The TXOP holder should transmit a CF_End frame in a basic rate non-HT PPDU, including non-HT duplicate PPDU, starting a SIFS after the L-SIG TXOP protected period, except during the 40 MHz phase of PCO operation (see 11.16).”

• 1524– Issue with proposed resolution is that NAV reset is no longer restricted to RTS– Alternate solution is to restrict the LSIG TXOP initiation to RTS/CTS– Issue with control wrapped RTS frame– No objection to transfer to MAC

• 174– Strawpoll

• Do you support limiting MF HT-Length to value equivalent to duration of (4095/6Mbps)?– Y 2+18– N 1– A 0

July 2007


Slide 27

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Motions

July 2007


Slide 28

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3

Submission

Motion #

• Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labeled “coex pending motion set X” in document 11-07/0339rY.– Based on resolutions for the ???? group

– Resolves YYY comments with As, Cs, and Rs

– Passed by unanimous consent

Documents

Doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2090r3 Submission July 2007 Eldad Perahia (Intel)Slide 1 Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report Notice: This document has been