stds-802-16-tg4: RE: RSSI/CCI summary
From: "Yigal Leiba" <yigall@runcom.co.il>
To: "'John Sydor'" <john.sydor@crc.ca>, <stds-802-16-tg4@ieee.org>
Subject: RE: stds-802-16-tg4: RSSI/CCI Summary
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 11:52:37 +0200
Hi all,
Here are the points from TG1 draft I think we can use for RSSI/CCI
information:
1. DBTC-REQ message (see IEEE P802.16/D4-2001section 6.2.2.3.22 and section
6.2.11.1). This is an unsolicited message sent from the SS to the BS to
request change in downlink modulation. We can add TLVs to this message to
convey RSSI/CCI information
2. RNG-REQ message ((see IEEE P802.16/D4-2001section 6.2.2.3.5 for message
definition, and section 6.2.11 for usage). This message may be
unsolicited, or may be a response to the BS RNG-RSP message. This is
another message
where we can add TLVs to convey RSSI/CCI information.
My opinion is that the RNG-REQ is the preferred option because all the
infrastructure for using it is already there, and because it is very much
related already to changes in the channel that may cause fades. Note that in
both these messages most of the allowed TLVs are optional, so if you don't
require them you don't pay any overhead.
Looking forward to our next conference cal,
Yigal Leiba
Runcom
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-16-tg4@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-16-tg4@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
> John Sydor
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 7:09 PM
> To: stds-802-16-tg4@ieee.org
> Subject: stds-802-16-tg4: RSSI/CCI Summary
>
>
> Brief summary of our 4 Oct telecom. Sorry for the delay in
> starting the
> CCÖfinger problems. In summary: TG1 already has a mechanism
> for getting the
> SS to undertake a RSSI measurement. Tal will post the
> reference to TG1 on
> the email reflector. Consensus seems to be building that the
> RSSI reading
> should be long term in duration ( ie significantly longer
> than a frame
> duration and probably over the duration of several
> seconds).This reading
> should be an absolute measurement (such as dBm/MHz or simply
> dB per channel
> BW) and may also include a BER and an identifier indicating
> the type of
> demodulation technique used to determine BER. Transmitting a
> mean signal
> strength variance has also been discussed, and would provide
> a reasonable
> parameter indicative of propagation channel stability. We
> still have to
> discuss CCI and how this is to be determined. The issue of
> separation of
> Interference to Noise is also up for discussion.
> These issues will be discussed in the next CC which is slated
> for Wednesday 10 October 2001 at 11:30 Hrs EST
>
> I would also encourage all participants to review document IEEE
> 802.16ab-01/01rl.July2001 (Air Interface for Fixed Broadband
> Wireless ÖÖ)
> Pages 37-42
> (Sections 6.2.7.7-6.7.7.8.3) where there is a description
> of the MAC
> messages that are intended for the communication of RSSI/CCI
> information.
>
> Thanks to all for participating.
>
>
> John Sydor
> Research Broad Band Wireless
> Communications Research Centre
> 3701 Carling Avenue
> Ottawa, Canada
> K2H 8S2
> Ph. 613-998-2388
> Fax.613-9908369
> john.sydor@crc.ca
>