[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: stds-802-16: sub10 issues

I have to agree with Jay.  While the discussions on FDD vs. TDD, etc. are
interesting, we can't lose sight of our immediate goal - preparation of a
PAR for the Executive Committee.  In my mind the most important issue at the
moment pertains to the frequency bands.  Should we limit the PAR to specific
frequency bands, licensed or unlicensed, or should it be wide open?

If we limit the coverage of the PAR, we may alienate some customers or
vendors.  A choice of specific frequency bands may also define the
fundamental air interface technology, by default.   On the other hand, if we
leave the PAR wide open we most certainly will overlap with FWA activities
in other standards bodies and that is not good.

As I indicated in the kick-off memo, I will be preparing a draft PAR for
review prior to the January meeting.  You can expect to see it next week (a
millennium present).  We should pick this apart as much as possible by
e-mail before the first Study Group session.  It would be ideal if we could
reach a general e-mail consensus by meeting time.

In the meantime:

Happy Holidays to all.

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Jay Klein [SMTP:jay@ensemblecom.com]
	Sent:	Thursday, December 23, 1999 4:03 AM
	To:	'stds-802-16@ieee.org'
	Subject:	stds-802-16: sub10 issues


	You are missing the most important point that the Sub10 group is
faced with (which are summarized by 3 basic questions):

	(a) Is there a need for an Air Interface Standard for <10 GHz BWA ?
(We need to justify such an activity for the 802 Ex. Com)

	(b) If the answer to (a) is yes then how would this activity merge
into the existing 802.16 activities and on what would it focus on ?

	(c) Which frequency bands should this group address ? Is there a
lower limit ? Is there a particular band ? 

	The technical issues of IP/ATM/TDD/FDD/OFDM/CDMA... are very
interesting but these issues won't be resolved in the next meeting. If
people answer question (a) with a YES, then there is work to be done to
write a relavant PAR. If we are all about moving quickly out of a "study
group" mode, we should no focus now on technical merits as you can see from
other PARs they are on one hand specific enough to focus the group and on
the other hand generic enough for allowing the group to go ahead and do its