RE: stds-802-16: sub10 issues

["Chayer, Remi" <rchayer@harris.com>]

I agree with Jay that we will have plenty of time to discuss the technical
matters.  From what I remember, the main discussion about the <10 GHz should be:
"Is there a need to address it?"  If yes, how do we want to do it?
 
My main concern is the possible schedule conflict between the >10 GHz and
<10GHz.  We have to find a way of allowing the same persons to attend both
without slowing down the first one, neither adding to meeting time we already
have; one week every two month is already tough to fit in my agenda.
 
Remi
-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Klein [mailto:jay@ensemblecom.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 1999 4:03 AM
To: 'stds-802-16@ieee.org'
Subject: stds-802-16: sub10 issues



Gentelmen, 

You are missing the most important point that the Sub10 group is faced with
(which are summarized by 3 basic questions):

(a) Is there a need for an Air Interface Standard for <10 GHz BWA ? (We need to
justify such an activity for the 802 Ex. Com)

(b) If the answer to (a) is yes then how would this activity merge into the
existing 802.16 activities and on what would it focus on ?

(c) Which frequency bands should this group address ? Is there a lower limit ?
Is there a particular band ? 

The technical issues of IP/ATM/TDD/FDD/OFDM/CDMA... are very interesting but
these issues won't be resolved in the next meeting. If people answer question
(a) with a YES, then there is work to be done to write a relavant PAR. If we are
all about moving quickly out of a "study group" mode, we should no focus now on
technical merits as you can see from other PARs they are on one hand specific
enough to focus the group and on the other hand generic enough for allowing the
group to go ahead and do its job.

Jay