Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-16] Fwd: 802.20 Voted Positions on 802.16e and g PARS

Dear all,
I hate to say that, but at least as far as the 802.16e is concerned 802.20 are right in their objection.  If the group really finds scaled  down versions to be necessary, but at least the bin structure, preamables, AAS and other PHY parameters should be kept identical to IEEE 802.16-2004.  I would suggest the following wording in the PAR:

Subscriber stations and base stations specified herein shall be interoperable with existing physical layer specifications in IEEE Std 802.16-2004 except when using one of their extensions with scaled down FFT sizes (1024, 512,128). For OFDM (256 FFT)/OFDMA (2048 FFT), which shall remain identical in all other PHY features to those specified in IEEE Std. 802.16-2004.

Furthermore I fail to see a strong committment of the group to the PAR, even the modified one, where a lot of comments are aiming to change those basic PHY features. I  believe those comments shouold be ruled out of scope.

I am sorry I cannot be with you in Portalnd. I hope you are enjoyoing the meeiting.

Avi Freedman

 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Forwarded by" <r.b.marks@IEEE.ORG>
To: <STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 6:45 PM
Subject: [STDS-802-16] Fwd: 802.20 Voted Positions on 802.16e and g PARS

> The referenced attachment is at
> <http://ieee802.org/secmail/bin00165.bin> -Roger
>
> >All,
> >The 802.20 Working Group passed two Directed Position motions
> >regarding the 802.16e and g PARs. Both motions direct the Chair to
> >vote against approving the PARs.
> >Attached are the motions and the associated rationale as discussed
> >and approved by the members.
> >I have also placed a paper copy in your office folders.
> >Regards,
> >Jerry Upton
> >Chair, IEEE 802.20
>