| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hello Ross, For usage model 1, with WUR working in a duty cycle mode, the power consumption will be less than the legacy PS mode. Even for the curtain, it may also be open/closed on person’s request. For example,
the owner of the house may want to have a nap/watch TV/a movie/reading/privacy issues, these all require different light condition/curtain status. Sorry, perhaps I was not clear enough. The issue is not comparison with legacy PS, it's comparison with operating the curtain. Let's imagine the following numbers (which I've just made up and could be completely wrong – that's why I'm asking for an energy budget) for operation on a typical day: - Energy needed to move the curtains: 1000 J - Energy needed to operate the curtain Wi-Fi if it uses legacy PS: 10 J - Energy needed to operate the curtain Wi-Fi if it uses WUR: 0.5 J Then indeed using WUR is 20 times more power-efficient than using legacy PS, but the benefit for the system is only (1000+10)/(1000+0.5) = 1% saving. This does not seem significant enough to make it a real use case. For usage model 3, personally I agree 1ms or 1s doesn’t make a lot of difference, but it will help reduce the latency with WUR. If that reduced latency doesn't make a significant difference, it's not a real use case. Thanks, Mark -- Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk From: Yujian (Ross Yu) [mailto:ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Mark, It seems I missed your previous Email. Thanks for the comment. I may not be able to attend the next conference call as it is a holiday in China. Let me give my comments through Email. For usage model 1, with WUR working in a duty cycle mode, the power consumption will be less than the legacy PS mode. Even for the curtain, it may also be open/closed on person’s request. For example,
the owner of the house may want to have a nap/watch TV/a movie/reading/privacy issues, these all require different light condition/curtain status. For usage model 3, personally I agree 1ms or 1s doesn’t make a lot of difference, but it will help reduce the latency with WUR. I am open for discussion, and will modify the usage model document regarding the group’s decision. Regards Ross Jian Yu Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd. ———————————————————————————————— Hello, I have the following comments on 17/0029r4: - in Usage Model 1: Smart Home, I suspect the power required to move the curtains twice a day will vastly exceed that required to run a STA in legacy PS mode for a day (using a suitable listen interval and BSS max idle period etc.). So I don't think this particular part of the usage model is convincing. Even the door seems a bit borderline to me (some kind of energy budget should be done to show that the energy needed to operate the lock a couple of times a day is significantly less than that needed to run a STA in legacy PS mode) - in Usage Model 3: Outdoor Cattle Farms, I don't think it will make a difference whether the emergency cow rustling signal takes 1 ms or 1 s to get transmitted. So I don't think "Delay should be a critical factor in case of emergency report"
is convincing. I'm similarly unconvinced by the Quick message/Incoming call notification/sensor alarm aspects of Usage Model 1: Smart Home Thanks, Mark -- Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk 发件人:
*** 802.11 TGba - WUR- Wake-up Radio Operation *** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGBA@xxxxxxxx]
代表
Mark Rison I would like to request time on the agenda to discuss the issues with the WUR Usage Model Document described in the attached email. Also, could you confirm the duration of this teleconf, please? 17/0258 and this invitation say 2 hours, but
http://www.ieee802.org/11/adminCalendar.html says 1.5 hours. Thanks, Mark -- Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk -----Original Appointment----- Here is a tentative agenda for the call on
Monday April 3rd 10am ET.
We will start from the remaining PHY presentations. For the presenters who are listed below, please check the schedule and let me know if it works for you.
Also note the following bridge information (we are NOT using join.me: conflicts with TGak call). <--- Scheduled Bridge – Do not edit or remove --- Monday, April 03, 2017 7:00 AM US Pacific Time 916-356-2663, 8-356-2663, Bridge: 3, Passcode: 4555152 For smartphones in the US and Lync softphone globally:
tel:"+19163562663,,3,,4555152#" Speed dialer: inteldialer://3,4555152
To
share or see content, join here -----------------------------------------------------------------> Agenda:
1.
Call the meeting to order
2.
IEEE 802 and 802.11 IPR policy and procedure
3.
Attendance reminder. Please send an email to Leif Wilhelmsson (leif.r.wilhelmsson@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
4.
Presentations:
·
PHY, 11-17-0326, WUR phase noise model follow-up, Minyoung Park, Intel
·
PHY, WUR link budget analysis, Rui Cao, Marvell
·
PHY, Waveform Generation for Waveform Coding, Junghoon Suh, Huawei
·
PHY, 11/17-0385 “Concurrent transmission of data and a wake-up signal in 802.11ax - Follow-up”, Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson
·
PHY, 11/17-0386 “Impact of reciprocal mixing on WUR performance” , Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson
5.
Adjourn
The conduct of this meeting is governed by IEEE, IEEE-SA and IEEE LMSC policies, which include:
The following documents provide additional information on the governing IEEE-SA policies:
In addition, the conduct of this meeting is governed by IEEE 802.11 Operations Manual (OM), which is also linked from here:
http://www.ieee802.org/11/Rules/rules.shtml Regards, Minyoung |