Doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2 Submission September 2007 Eldad Perahia (Intel)Slide 1 Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report Date: 2007-09-12 Authors:

September 2007

Eldad Perahia (Intel)

Slide 1

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report

Date: 2007-09-12

Name Company Address Phone email

Eldad Perahia Intel [email protected]

Authors:

September 2007


Slide 2

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Abstract

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

September 2007


Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Overview

• Submissions• Comment Resolution• Latest version of spreadsheet: 07/0339r18

September 2007


Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

http://www.ieee.org/web/membership/ethics/code_ethics.html

http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html

http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf

September 2007


Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

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

September 2007


Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Subgroups (1/2)

• 40-20 in 2.4GHz– 6 comments– CIDs: 2134, 2883, 2509, 2581 (Matt F., 07/2020)– CID 2481: 40MHz in 2.4 GHz scanning TBDs– CID 2906: duplicate DSSS (Allert)

• PCO– 31 comments– 11.16– Tomo is assignee

• L-SIG TXOP– 6 comments– CIDs 2233, 232, 2254 (07/734)– CIDs 2171, 566, 1743 – Yuichi is assignee

• ECSA– CID 3024 (Add Supported Regulatory Classes sub-element to Optional Extension of Neighbor Report)– Refer comment to TGk?

• DFS & channel selection– 9 comments– CIDs 3083, 2582, 1870, 2583, 2585 (Matt F., 07/2020)– CIDs 2572, 2893, 2575, 2894 (Solomon, 07/2326 and/or TGy 07/2365)

September 2007


Slide 12

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Subgroups (2/2)

• Channel switching– 14 comments (Matt F., 07/2020)

• CCA sensing– 4 comments– 568, 70, 187, 2963 – Assaf is assignee– CID 70, Doug, 07/2334

• 40/20– 6 comments– All addressed by Vinko, 07/611

• Protection mechanisms– 64 comments– 24 addressed by Bjorn in 07/2316– 40 addressed by Bjorn in 07/2380

• DSSS-CCK– 9 comments– All addressed by Eldad, 07/2328

September 2007


Slide 13

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Submissions Related to Comment Resolution

• Matt F.– 11-07-2020-13-000n-lb97-cid-2582-bss-width-switching.doc

• Vinko– 11-07-0611-03-000n-lb97-coex-20-40-coex-comments-resolution.doc

• Yuichi– Continuation of 11-07-734 (3/4 done)– 11-07-2394-00-000n-lb78-coex-lsigtxop-final.doc

• Bjorn– 11-07-2316-01-000n-lb97-coex-protection-mechanisms-part-1.doc– 11-07-2380-00-000n-lb97-coex-protection-mechanisms-part-2.doc

• Doug– 11-07-2334-01-000n-discussion-on-cca-sensing-on-20-40-mhz-secondary-channel-with-pifs-and-difs.ppt– 20/40 operation in 5 GHz

• Eldad– 11-07-2326-02-000n-tgn-lb97-coex-cid-2893.doc– 11-07-2328-02-000n-coex-dsss-cck.doc– Scanning parameter

• Tomoko– 11-07-2122-00-000n-tgn-lb97-submission-for-category-pco-in-coex-ad-hoc.doc

• Assaf• Peter

– Scanning parameter

Red indicates completedsubmissions

(+) indicates submissionwas discussed

September 2007


Slide 14

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

ERs & EMR

• CID 2243 (ER)– Comment proposes to modify a paragraph in the LSIG TXOP section that was already

deleted based on CID 1737– Resolution in July was to Accept and refer to CID 1737– Resolution should be “Counter. refer to CID 1737”

• CID 3272 (ER)– 07/614r10 deleted all text in 9.20.4 and replaced it with new text– However the resolution to CID 3272 was to accept a modification to the second

paragraph in 9.20.4, that now no longer exists• Change "A non-AP STA that is a member of a 40 MHz BSS shall not transmit 20 MHz frames

in the secondary channel." to "A non-AP STA that is a member of a 40 MHz BSS shall not transmit non-Control type 20 MHz frames in the secondary channel.”

– Previously agreed upon resolution to CID 3272 in 07/614r10 will be added to 07/2020– Resolution should be “Accept. Refer to 07/2020rXX”

• CID 1669 (EMR)– Comment states that the scanning is too slow– Comment is recycled, as was CID 2481, awaiting scanning parameters discussion of

TBDs

September 2007


Slide 15

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

DFS & Channel Selection & E-CSA

• All modifications to 11.9.7 have been removed from the draft, as they were incorporated in the TGy draft

• CIDs 2572, 2893, 2575, 2894 ask for modifications to text that is in the TGy draft, along with addition modifications to signaling E-CSA capability

• 07/2326 resolves these CIDs by modifying both TGy and adding new TGn text• 07/2326r0 was presented on the August 22 Coex conference call and was updated to

07/2326r2 based on comments during call• TGy has incorporated proposed changes in 07/2326r2 into their own E-CSA

submission 07/2365, since similar comments were also submitted to their letter ballot

• TGy will vote on the adoption of 07/2365 on Tuesday, September 18th during the AM1 session

• Proposed steps:– Defer discussion of 07/2326 until after TGy meeting– If 07/2365 adopted by TGy, resolve CIDs 2572, 2893, 2575, 2894 with “Counter. addressed

by TGy 07/2365”– If 07/2365 not adopted by TGy, discuss 07/2326r2

September 2007


Slide 16

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

E-CSA CID 3024

• Comment: Information on supported Regulatory Classes has to be advertised in the Neighbor Report as well

• Proposed change: Add Supported Regulatory Classes sub-element to Optional Extension of Neighbor Report

• History– On August 21, Bruce emailed the chairs of TGy and TGk regarding

whether this change can be done and whether there is interest in making this change in TGk

– On September 6, Eldad emailed the chairs of TGn and TGk a reminder of this comment and a repeat of the suggestion that TGk take this comment

• Proposed Resolution– Counter. Since the Neighbor Report is still being changed in TGk, it is

preferable to manage all the Neighbor Report changes in TGk. The chair of TGk has been informed of this comment.

– (Bjorn: would could reject)

September 2007


Slide 17

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

40 MHz in 2.4 GHz Scanning Parameters

• As per motion #217, 07/614r10 was adopted with the following amendment– “values for the ranges and the DEFVALs of all the MIB

attributes that have a syntax of integer be replaced with TBD”

• CIDs 2481 & 1669 are unresolved, pending decision on scanning parameters MIB attribute values

• Proposed steps– In order to address other open CIDs, defer discussion to next week– Make decision next week whether to discuss in Coex ad hoc or full

TGn

September 2007


Slide 18

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Wed September 12 Agenda

• Submissions– 11-07-2122 (Tomo)– 11-07-2328-01-000n-coex-dsss-cck.doc (Eldad)– 11-07-2020-13-000n-lb97-cid-2582-bss-width-switching.doc

(Matt)

September 2007


Slide 19

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Minutes for Wed September 12

• ERs– Resolution should be “Counter. refer to CID 1737”– No objection to updating the database accordingly

• DFS & Channel Selection & E-CSA CIDs 2572, 2893, 2575, 2894 – No objection to proposed steps on slide 15

• E-CSA CID 3024– Bjorn: we could reject

• 40 MHz in 2.4 GHz Scanning Parameters– Defer discussion to next week, unless we finish other CIDs

September 2007


Slide 20

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

07/2122 (PCO, Tomo)• CID 72

– Changes made to the first paragraph– Changes made to third paragraph to define timer at beginning of paragraph– Changes made to third paragraph to add “shalls” to clarify normative nature– There is now no change to text that was added by the previously resolved CID 71, so new resolution to CID 70 is deleted

• CID 652– Add “20 MHz” to sentence for clarification

• CID 1772– Change from counter to reject

• CID 2603– Add status code for rejecting association– Change from accept to counter

• CID 2599– Operating Mode changed to HT Protection– need to confirm that the PCO exception to HT Protection is covered in HT Protection section

• CID 2600– Change to counter– Delete quoted text– Add sentence indicated that PCO operation occurs in a 20/40 MHz BSS

• CID 2604– Change to counter

• CID 2607– Change to counter– Add “plus a transition time”

• CID 2609– Change to counter– Modify proposed change to “at least PIFS”

• Reviewed through 2612

September 2007


Slide 21

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Thursday September 13 Agenda

• Submissions– 11-07-2122 (Tomo)– 11-07-2316-01-000n-lb97-coex-protection-mechanisms-part-1.doc– 11-07-2380-00-000n-lb97-coex-protection-mechanisms-part-2.doc

September 2007


Slide 22

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Thursday September 13 minutes

• 07/2122 (PCO, Tomo)– Continue with CID 2613– CID 2615

• Change “PCO non-AP active STA” to “PCO active non-AP STA”– CID 2965 & 2966

• Change to reject– Do you accept 07/2122r3 as resolution to PCO CIDs contained in

said document, and bringing CIDs to motion in full TGn?• Yes: 13• No: 1• Abs: 0

September 2007


Slide 23

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

07/2316r1 (Protection Mechanisms, Part 1)

• CID 26– Yuichi is planning on submission changing multi-rate section forcing a response controlled by initiator of the

protection exchange– Defer

• CID 106– Undo proposed change– Change “shall” to “are”

• CID 1734– No objection to deleting note (after some discussion)– Need to redo resolution for 107

• Change it to counter, with resolution “note deleted, refer to CID 1734”• CID 1701 & CID 109

– No objection to deleting note (after some discussion)• CID 1849

– Change to “counter”– Discussion on whether to change protection of GF frames in presence of non-GF device from “shall” to “may”– Change proposed change from “may” to “should” and delete “but it is not a requirement”

• CID 322– Change to “reject” (no draft text change)

• CID 1539– Discussion on duplicate DSSS

September 2007


Slide 24

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

CID 1539

• Do you support resolving CID 1539 with protection frame using Duplicate DSSS waveform?– Yes: 5– No: 12– Abstain: 2

• Defer CID 1539 to re-do strawpoll in TGn full • Implies deferral of

– 1538, 25, 1848

• No objections to deferring

September 2007


Slide 25

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

07/2316, continued

• CID 1702– Need to confirm text in 9.13.3.3 and 9.13.3.2 before resolving this – Defer

• CID 2222– Change to “counter”– Defer for CID 26

• CID 2809– Need to re-resolve CID 565: “Counter. Refer to CID 2809”

• CID 2815– Bjorn to have Shravan to send withdrawal to Eldad

September 2007


Slide 26

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

07/2380r0 (Protection Mechanisms, Part 2)

• CID 1658 & 1659– Modify resolution to refer to 2.07– Minority in favor of deferring CID in order to contact commenter

• CID 1660– Strawpoll: Should we reject CID 1660?

• Yes 13• No 4• Abs 4

– Strawpoll: accept wording in 07/2380r0• Yes: 9• No: 4• Abs: 5

– Strawpoll: resolution “07/329r2 was presented during March 2007 coex ad hoc. Straw polls were taken indicating that the TG needed additional evidence of a problem. No such evidence was presented.”

• Yes: 15 • No: 1• Abs: 4

September 2007


Slide 27

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

07/2380r0 continued

• CID 28– Modified “second column” to column labeled “…”

• CID 1540, 1850, 1706, 3094, 3095– Matt Smith: will be compatibility issue between D3.0 and D2.0 if RIFS Mode field is removed– Defer to tomorrow for Matt to investigate

• CID 323– Strawpoll:

• Reject CID: 13• Do not reject CID: 2• Abs: 3

– Strawpoll:• In favor of current resolution wording: 11• Opposed to current resolution wording: 0• Abstain: 7

• CID 76– Strawpoll:

• Reject CID: 12• Do not reject CID:4• Abs: 3

– Strawpoll:• In favor of current resolution wording: 11• Opposed to current resolution wording:4• Abstain:2

– Strawpoll: removing “TG believes that the”• In favor of modified resolution: 13• Opposed: 3• Abs: 4

September 2007


Slide 28

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Motions

September 2007


Slide 29

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Motion #

• Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labelled “coex pending motion set 1” in document 11-07/0339r18.– Based on resolutions for a few more 20/40 comments in 07/2280r1– Resolves 12 comment with Cs and R– Passed by no objection on July 25th Coex Ad Hoc conference call

September 2007


Slide 30

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Motion #

• Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labelled “coex pending motion set 2” in document 11-07/0339r18.– Based on resolutions for DFS Channel selection comments in

07/2098r3– Resolves 3 comment with Rs– Passed by no objection on August 1st Coex Ad Hoc conference

call

September 2007


Slide 31

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Motion #

• Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labelled “coex pending motion set 3” in document 11-07/0339r18.– Based on resolutions for channel switching in 07/2055r3– Resolves 15 comment with A, Cs and Rs– Passed by no objection on August 22nd Coex Ad Hoc conference

call

September 2007


Slide 32

doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2

Submission

Motion #

• Moved: Approve resolution of comments found on the tab labelled “coex pending motion set 4” in document 11-07/0339r18.– CID 2479 was to be motioned in July as part of resolutions in

07/568r2– Allert asked for this CID to be deferred– Allert later stated via email on Aug 23 that he accepts the

resolution– Resolves 1 comment with A

Documents

Doc.: IEEE 802.11-07/2379r2 Submission September 2007 Eldad Perahia (Intel)Slide 1 Coex Ad Hoc May Montreal Agenda and Report Date: 2007-09-12 Authors: