[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: wpan/ RE: stds-802-16: RE: WLAN/ New Structure of the Coexistence Group
All:
an enterprise / analyst perspective.
if co-existence is not a formal bi-product of your standards work, your
market influence and
products will be DOA. Market acceptance will be slow to a trickle in all but
niche applications.
The acceptance (or lack there of) of 802.11 (of which I am original author)
based products are a case in point
--- relative to co-existence and interoperability issues.
From a enterprise perspective .11/bluetooth is a disaster in progress and
the only reason it
has not raised its ugly head more visibly, is that there are almost no BT
products around.
As .11 products make their way into public spots like airport, hotels,
convention centers
any move by .16 type products to use the same spectrum must take into
consideration
the co-existence issues. (directional antennae is not the answer)
i take (on average) 1200 calls from IT managers/year about various wireless
topics.
The first questions are; do they work, and are the reliable?. Well, will
they be without
addressing the spectrum use co-existence issues?
if you don't address co-existence, the question you need to ask yourselves -
how lucky do you feel? :-)
Bob Egan
Vice President & Research Director - Mobile & Wireless
GartnerGroup
bob.egan@gartner.com
direct: 401-531-2600
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Shellhammer [mailto:shell@symbol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 4:56 PM
To: dkostas@adaptivebroadband.com; stds-802-11@ieee.org;
Stds-802-16@ieee.org; stds-802-wpan@ieee.org; ken@MalibuNetworks.com
Subject: wpan/ RE: stds-802-16: RE: WLAN/ New Structure of the
Coexistence Group
Demos,
I am not trying to imply in any way that 802.11 and 802.15 own the
unlicenced bands. Since anyone can use the band I believe the IEEE 802
should
strive to ensure that any systems based on an IEEE 802 standard will coexist
with
any other system based on any other IEEE 802 standard.
By the way, meeting the FCC rules does not ensure coexistence within
the band. I think that has been demonstrated by 802.11b and Bluetooth.
Steve
>>> "Kostas, Demos" <dkostas@adaptivebroadband.com> 11/29/00 04:18PM >>>
I just want to get another perspective in from that voiced by Steve who
wrote "...802.16 will be potentially moving into unlicensed bands, that
are used by 802.11 and 802.15." .
That is not accurate in that the UN-II bands are "actually" used (to support
real traffic access for a number of ISP) by a number of Broadband FWA
systems, that meet the FCC U-NII requirements. So yes 802.16.4 will work to
reach industry agreements on how the U-NII bands can also support 802.16
standard based FWA systems. 802.11 and 802.15 do not have any legal
exclusive on the U- NII bands. 802.16, 802.11, and 802.15 standard based
equipment have to meet the same FCC regulations on the UNII that the rest of
the equipment that meet the Part 15 Subsection E constraints.
Dr. Demosthenes J. Kostas
Director, Industry Standards
Adaptive Broadband Corporation
3314 Dartmouth Ave
Dallas, TX 75205 USA
tel: 214 520 8411
fax: 214 520 9802
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Shellhammer [mailto:shell@symbol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 7:12 AM
To: stds-802-11@ieee.org; Stds-802-16@ieee.org; stds-802-wpan@ieee.org;
ken@MalibuNetworks.com
Subject: RE: stds-802-16: RE: WLAN/ New Structure of the Coexistence
Group
Ken,
I think the concern is that up till now 802.16 was in licenced
bands and so did not impact 802.11 and 802.15. Now however, as I
understand it, 802.16 will be potentially moving into unlicenced bands,
that are used by 802.11 and 802.15. If they operate in the same band
it is no longer practical to only consider individual systems, it is
necessary
to consider the other systems in the band.
Steve
>>> Ken Peirce <ken@Malibunetworks.com> 11/28/00 12:33PM >>>
I feel that option #1 is most workable/productive. A small subset of a WG
can meet on the side to discuss coexistance issues relevant to a particular
application; interim meetings included.
However, I do agree that a distinct leadership would be required for
coordination of formal 802.16 output(s). Perhaps Roger could appoint, or
802.16 elect, a highly interested person who could serve as an effort
coordinator/integrator. The proposed output could then be put to the 802.16
for approval.
If it is not too late in the process, I think that the first task for this
person and the WG subgroups should be to work with the SARS folks.
My $.02
Ken Peirce
-------
This message came from the IEEE P802.15 General Mailing List at
"stds-802-wpan@ieee.org".
Info at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/
-------
This message came from the IEEE P802.15 General Mailing List at
"stds-802-wpan@ieee.org".
Info at http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/