| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Andrew, Thanks. I have given you time on the agenda on Monday PM2 and Wednesday PM2. And of course, we have the WG closing on Thursday PM2 for final approval of a liaison. I have put in a request to see if we can have the room during the times when there are no meetings scheduled, for any off-line meetings. Let’s see if that is possible. Approval of the liaison is just approval of the document to go to the EC. No need for a change to the process. See you in San Diego, Steve From: Andrew Myles (amyles) [mailto:amyles@xxxxxxxxx]
G’day Steve I have uploaded three documents to the 802.19 WG server ·
19-16-0109-00 is a draft proposed LS to 3GPP
RAN/RAN1 in Word format in response to:
o
The recent 3GPP RAN LS relating to the LAA process
o
The recent 3GPP RAN1 LS containing technical responses to IEEE 802 LS about LAA Rel. 13 ·
19-16-111-00 is a ppt format summary of the above document ·
19-16-110-00 is a thought piece about ED/PD issues that was inspired by a request from
3GPP RAN1
o
It might also be of interest to 802.11 TGax I suspect there is insufficient time on the 802.19 WG agenda to undertake the necessary detailed review of
19-16-0109-00. I suggest that we arrange some ad hoc time to allow review and completion of the LS (noting that a response for one issue is currently still work in progress) I also suggest we look for ways of short cutting the approval process. Rather than asking whether members agree with every element of the proposed LS (a very high bar), we could ask members whether
they believe the issues in the proposed LS are important enough to an important subset of IEEE 802 stakeholders to justify liaison to 3GPP RAN/RAN1. This is a slightly lower bar, which promotes consensus by getting all issues by any stakeholders into the open
for resolution. I expect additional authors will be added to the author list of
19-16-0109-00 before next week. However, I did not wait for the author list to be complete before uploading the draft, because it is important that everyone a chance to review it this week. That said, I note that I will not be responding to any suggested
changes this week because I am taking a couple of days off for PTO. Happy reading … Andrew From: Andrew Myles (amyles)
G’day Steve I don’t have a presentation ready yet. However, I can tell you that a group of IEEE 802 stakeholders are working behind the scenes on responses to the most recent 3GPP RAN1 LS for discussion in San Diego. The draft is not quite ready
for “prime time” discussion in 802.19, but it is getting close. I can tell you that it in relation to consensus between IEEE 802 and 3GPP RAN1 on the responses in the 3GPP RAN1 LS, there is likely to be: ·
No consensus on about a quarter of the responses
·
Some consensus on about a half of the responses
·
Full consensus on about a quarter of the responses
This is very encouraging, reflecting a relatively productive relationship between the two organisations (IEEE 802 and 3GPP RAN1). As usual with any technical discussion/negotiation, the hard part
is to close off the last few important issues. The proposed response is being structured so that the response to each of the twelve 3GPP RAN1 responses to the IEEE 802 comments can consist of multiple self-contained parts. This is being done
so that different perspectives from a diversity of stakeholders can be expressed on each of the sub-issues related to each comment. This means the question for 802.19 in San Diego will not be “do you agree with every part of the responses?”, but rather
“ do you agree that there is value in 3GPP RAN1 considering these responses?”, which should make progress easier. If anyone would like to contribute a response to the 3GPP RAN1 response or a sub-issue within a 3GPP RAN1 response, feel free to send it to me or reply to the 802.19 reflector. Any reasonable response
will probably be included in the draft for consideration by 802.19 in San Diego. Andrew PS I will also have a separate presentation (from me as an individual) related to the request from 3GPP RAN1 that IEEE 802.11 WG consider using ED = -72dBm in the future rather than our current ED/PD
mechanism. I will upload this next week. From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Does anyone have a presentation they would like to make at the Thursday conference call on 3GPP Liaisons? http://ieee802.org/19/pub/calls.htm Steve |