Re: [STDS-802-11] IEEE 802.11 PDED Ad Hoc status and plans

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

G’day all

A number of members have noted that ETSI BRAN has now approved version 2.0.6 of EN 301 893 for ENAP (national voting). This document is relevant to future activities and discussions in the IEEE 802.11 PDED ad hoc.

The ETSI BRAN documents are available to IEEE 802.11 WG members in the private members area. Adrian Stephens, could you please upload version 2.0.6 of EN 301 893 for the information of our members?

Andrew

BTW Feel free to respond to the e-mail below. I believe the formal LS response from 3GPP RAN1 has been received by IEEE 802 and will be uploaded in the next day or so. I understand that the draft response (reported below) and the final response are the same

From: Andrew Myles (amyles)
Sent: Monday, 21 November 2016 5:38 PM
To: *** IEEE stds-802-11 List ***
Subject: IEEE 802.11 PDED Ad Hoc status and plans

G’day all

In San Antonio, the IEEE 802.11 PDED ad hoc approved a LS to 3GPP RAN1 (see 11-16-1493-04) in response to their request for future 802.11 PHYs to adopt ED = -72dBm. The LS was subsequently approved by the IEEE 802.11 WG and the IEEE 802 EC. The version actually sent under signature of IEEE 802 Chair will eventually be found here.

It was also agreed that the IEEE 802.11 PDED ad hoc should remain in existence until at least the session in January 2017 in Atlanta, and probably longer, with the following tasks:

· Address any reply from 3GPP RAN1

· Develop further data (based on simulation and testing?) for future LS’s

· Address the question of ED threshold in EN 301 893 that applies to IEEE 802.11ax

3GPP RAN1 met last week and apparently considered the LS that was developed by the IEEE 802.11 PDED Ad Hoc in San Antonio. I have not seen the official reply yet but I understand the quick summary is:

· No answer yet. They deferred the request for ongoing collaboration to 3GPP RAN

· No! They believe an ED of -72dBm is the best way forward for fair coexistence and they have no plans to consider any alternatives

The details of the response are likely to be as follows:

· IEEE 802 request

o IEEE 802 LMSC kindly requests RAN1 to consider the following:

§ Indicating its interest in a continued dialog towards a future framework for efficient sharing of the 5 GHz band

§ Explicitly defining support for PD-based channel access in a future release of LAA specification

· IEEE 802 notes that support for both preamble detection and preamble transmission (e.g. using CTS-to-Self frames) by LAA devices, together with an alignment of the PD and ED thresholds used by LAA devices with those of 802.11 technologies, would be mutually beneficial for coexistence between deployed 802.11, 802.11ax and LAA devices. This approach would form the basis for the most efficient and fair spectrum sharing between IEEE 802 and 3GPP technologies

· 3GPP RAN1 response

o While RAN1 welcomes communication and continued dialog with IEEE 802 on coexistence between technologies sharing the 5GHz band, RAN1 respectfully defers this question to RAN plenary for further consideration.

o RAN1 notes that there was extensive discussion on the various coexistence mechanisms including IEEE 802.11 preamble transmission and preamble detection by LAA eNBs. Considering all the pros and cons of the possible approaches, RAN1 had concluded at that time that adopting an ED threshold of -72dBm for a 23dBm transmitter was the best way forward to enable a technology neutral mechanism for coexistence in the 5GHz band. After further discussion, energy detection was considered as a viable technology neutral solution which can ensure fair coexistence with IEEE 802.11 devices and there was no consensus to consider alternative mechanisms for spectrum sharing between IEEE 802 and 3GPP technologies at this time.

This suggests successful collaboration with 3GPP RAN1 on fair coexistence issues is likely to be problematic going forward because they seem to have made up their minds and do not seem to be very enthusiastic about ongoing collaboration. Of course that does not mean IEEE 802 should stop considering coexistence issues. They are too important to the ongoing success of 802.11/Wi-Fi, and particularly IEEE 802.11ax. It just means we may need to include additional audiences for our ongoing work, including 3GPP RAN4, ETSI BRAN and possibly regulators and users.

It was clear from the Sony simulations (11-16-1451-00) presented in San Antonio that adopting an ED of -72dBm would put IEEE 802.11ax at a significant disadvantage to legacy IEEE 802.11a/n/ac based equipment. This in itself provides a good reason to reject an ED of -72dBm. However, it might be interesting to evaluate some other scenarios, included those discussed during the first teleconference (11-16-1291-00). Is anyone planning further simulations along these lines or any other lines? When will they be available?

ETSI BRAN have two meetings scheduled before the end of the year. I suspect they will attempt to close on the current version of EN 301 893 that specifies ED of -72dBm but has an exception for IEEE 802.11a/n/ac based on the use of PD at -82dBm. This means that IEEE 802 will need to prepare a case for an ongoing exception for IEEE 802.11ax in the next version of EN 301 893 starting in the new year. Does anyone have ideas for how to approach the discussion with ETSI BRAN? Please prepare material for the Atlanta meeting, and notify me that you are doing so.

Looking at the calendar over the next two months there are not many good times to hold teleconferences. Therefore I am suggesting that we defer teleconferences and focus on discussions in Atlanta. Of course that does not mean everyone can ignore PDED topics until then. Use of e-mail to discuss issues is definitely encouraged!

Andrew Myles
Chair, IEEE 802.11 PDED ad hoc


Andrew Myles Manager, Enterprise Standards amyles@xxxxxxxxx Phone: +61 2 8446 1010 Mobile: +61 418 656587	Cisco Systems Limited The Forum 201 Pacific Highway St Leonards 2065 AUSTRALIA Cisco.com