[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
wpan/ RE: WLAN/ New Structure of the Coexistence Group
One more thought to add to this conversation:
Does the first group to develop a standard in a particular band get
"squatters rights"? Or, does some new standard or new application of an
existing standard in a fresh band have to be "designed for coexistence"?
If the preference is for the former, we are likely to see a gold-rush
mentality as various groups stampede to develop a standard in virgin bands.
If the preference is for the latter, I believe that the only way to
coordinate and enforce coexistence among the various 802 wireless working
groups is through an independent working group that answers only to ExCom
and has "near veto power" over other wireless working groups. Are we
willing to live in that type of environment?
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On
Behalf Of Carl Temme
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 11:35 PM
To: Steve Shellhammer
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; Stdsemail@example.com; wpan
Subject: Re: WLAN/ New Structure of the Coexistence Group
Coexistence across wireless working groups is vital, therefore I favor
options 2 or 3 over option 1. New proposals for the unlicensed bands must
based on still yet to be established coexistence guidelines. No new
standards should be developed for the unlicensed bands without *first*
guidelines. Either forms 2 or 3 seem capable of establishing coexistence
Which structure is best depends on operating principles. I believe it is
important that application of the coexistence guidelines be based on
principle and 802
must avoid creating new wireless standards (now or in the future) that
operate in the same radio space and yet do not coexist with any of its
standards in that radio space. Membership in various wireless working
groups may increase or decrease as standards appear and mature. Therefore,
to be a problem with managing coexistence through a joint task group which
votes to approve new wireless standards, since the votes might just reflect
numbers of active voters in working groups, rather than rational coexistence
This leads me to ask about a (fourth?) option where a joint task group (as
Steve and Al have proposed) *develops* guidelines and then ExCom them self
(or an 802
Wireless Coexistence Working Group) *applies* the guidelines in some
Steve Shellhammer wrote:
> Within IEEE 802.15 we have a task group (TG2) to address the issue
> of WPANs and WLANs in the unlicenced band. Recently there has been a
growing interest in
> the issue of Coexistence within IEEE 802.11, with the formation of the 5G
study group. Also
> recently the IEEE 802.16 working group has established the Wireless HUMAN
group to look
> at establishing standards for Broadband wireless access in the unlicenced
> As a result of all this activity we are looking for the best
structure to address Coexistence
> within the IEEE 802 Wireless working groups. The purpose of this email is
to start an email discussion
> on these reflectors about the various options that we have. The plan
after that would be to capture
> the essence of this discussion and to make a proposal at the Monterey
meeting as to how to structure
> the Coexistence work within the Wireless 802 groups.
> Attached is a presentation that Al Petrick and I made at the Joint
802.11 and 802.15 meeting
> in Tampa. This proposal represents one approach.
> The following are the three approaches I have heard mentioned.
Please comment on them by
> replying to this email. Please include all three email reflectors so
members of all three wireless working
> groups can participate.
> 1. Set up three separate coexistence task groups, one in each working
> 2. Form a joint Task Group under the three working groups. This is a
new structure that
> has never be done before.
> 3. Form a new working group. This Wireless 802 Coexistence working
group would address
> all coexistence issues within the unlicenced bands.
> Please send in your comments.
Type: Microsoft PowerPoint Show (application/vnd.ms-powerpoint)
This message came from the IEEE P802.15 General Mailing List at "firstname.lastname@example.org".
Info at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/