TGn to WG15 September 2004 Liaison Report

1
Project IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless
Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission
Title TGn to WG15 Liaison Report Date
Submitted 16 September 2004 Source James D.
Allen Company Appairent Technologies Address
Add address Street, City, PC, Province/State,
Country VoiceAdd telephone number, FAX Add
FAX number, E-MailAdd e-mail address Re
Excerpted from TGn Chairs closing report,
document 11-04-1xxx-00-000n Abstract Summary
of September 2004 Berlin meeting
status Purpose Inform the WG 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.
2
These notes courtesy of Bruce Kraemer, Chair TGn
with my editorial comments

• Partially From Document
• 11-04-1030-02-000n

3
September Summary

• Good news
• 32 presentations completed
• Because the presentations did not fill every
  available meeting minute there was adequate time
  to caucus and, at least tentatively, explore
  possible mergers which would result in new
  completes or revised completes.
• Bad News
• Complete presentations did not have adequate time
  to present or answer audience questions.
• Not enough time to conduct panel discussion or
  additional selection steps.
• Not known how many completes will exist in
  November

4
(No Transcript)
5
November Agenda Challenge

• Panel Discussion
• Possible inclusion of one or more additional
  complete proposal
• Extended presentation and QA time for completes
• Additional technical presentations anticipated
• Need to refresh audience memory

6
Selection Process 665r9
You Are here
Mergers may
A
take place.
Step 11
The TG may
decide time
Step 11
Mergers may
The remaining
Step 13
take place.
required for
proposals may
Initial 60 Minutes
The TG may
consideration of
Step 7
undergo technical
presentation for all
decide time
new mergers
changes without
proposals.
required for
Step 8
Panel discussion.
requiring a
consideration of
merge.
new mergers
Step 16
Elimination vote.
Step 9
Eliminate proposal
Recess to allow
with least support.
merger granted at
Any new
option of TG.
Y
mergers?
Presentation of
merged proposals.
N
Y
Presentation of all
Any Mergers
remaining
Y
take place?
proposals
Discard un-
merged partial
Step 10
proposals.
N
Step 13
The remaining
proposals may
Panel Discussion
undergo technical
More than 1
Final 5 minute
at option of the
Y
changes without
proposal left?
statement.
Step 12
chair
requiring a
25 low-bar
merge.
Elimination vote
N
Step
60 minute
Step 15
17
presentation of
Statements from
Roll-call
More than 1
no voters of why
remaining
Step 14
N
confirmation vote
proposal left?
they voted no.
proposals
including Q A
N
Step 20
Step 19
Editor prepares
Draft 1.0. Vote that
Adopt proposal as
Response by
75 for ?
initial technical
it is technically
Y
proposers.
specification
consistent with
technical spec.
N
Y
75 for ?
Roll-call
75 for ?
confirmation vote
Y
Step 18
Step 11
Forward Draft 1.0
Mergers may
Bring back last
to WG for Letter
Step 21
N
take place.
three proposals
Ballot
The TG may
Step 13
decide time
The remaining
required for
proposals may
consideration of
Drawing by Adrian Stephens
undergo technical
new mergers
Procedure End
September 16, 2003
changes without
requiring a
merge.
7
Selection Process 665r9
A
Mergers may take place. The TG may decide time
required for consideration of new mergers.
Initial 60 minutes presentation for all
proposals. Panel discussion.
Step 11
Step 7
Step 8
Step 9
Recess to allow merger granted at option of TG.
Presentation of merged proposals.
Any new mergers?
By Nov 4th
Y
N
Discard unmerged partial proposals.
Note this
Step 10
Step 13
The remaining proposals may undergo technical
changes without requiring a merge.
Final 5 minute statement. 25 low-bar Elimination
vote.
Step 12
60 minute presentation of remaining proposals..
8
My Comments

• Interesting points
• Well run
• Partial proposals are need to merge to be voted
  on.
• 802.15.3 was presented by Allen as an independent
  proposal
• Many techniques included data aggregation
• Many techniques included increasing band to 40
  MHz.
• Working with .11, .15 and .19 leadership to make
  sure .15 has some say as to how channels are
  bonded and how coexistence is optimized more
  later.
• Heard that up to 680 Mbps was proposed