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

Re: [STDS-802-16] [PREAMBLE] Aug 16 Preamble Ad-Hoc group CC sum mary



Peiying,

I have a conflict on Friday and I prefer option 2 (Monday 7-9am US
Pacific).  By then, I will have a detailed complexity analysis to share
with the group.

Thanks,

Jeff

Peiying Zhu wrote:

> Hi, All:
>
> Sorry for the mix up for the next CC time options. I was looking for
> the wrong week of Thursday. My original suggestion for options 2 was
> for Thursday Aug. 19 (not Aug. 26), which leaves us some room for
> another meeting on Monday Aug. 23 if needed. The reason
> for these choices is to make attempts to reach some conclusions before
> the reply deadline, Aug. 24. I realized that the next CC slot should
> be the morning, I thought it is too short notice to have a meeting on
> Thursday morning. Aug. 26 is not a good time since some people
> including me started to pack for the trip to Korean.
>
> Let us try again. Since it is a short notice for Thursday Aug. 19
> (tonight), I add another option for tomorrow morning .
>
> Option 1: Monday Aug. 23 --- 7:00-9:00 am USA pacific time, 11 pm for
> Seoul, 5 pm for TelAviv, 10 am for Ottawa
>
> Option 2: Thursday Aug. 19 (tonight) --- 20:00-22:00 USA pacific time,
> 12:00 for Seoul, 6:00 for TelAviv, 23:00 for Ottawa, this leaves us
> another slot on Monday (Aug. 23) morning if needed.
>
> Option 3: Friday Aug. 20 -- 7:00-9:00 USA pacific time,11 pm for
> Seoul, 5 pm for TelAviv, 10 am for Ottawa, this leaves us another slot
> on Monday (Aug. 23) morning if needed.
>
> Regards,
>
> Peiying
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhu, Peiying [CAR:DP13:EXCH]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2004 2:49 PM
> To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] [PREAMBLE] Aug 16 Preamble Ad-Hoc group CC
> sum mary
>
>     Dear All:
>
>     Hope that everyone submitted your comments on time and managed to
>     get some rest. Unfortunately, we still have some unfinished
>     business here. We need to resume our efforts for harmonization.
>     Can you please kindly let me know if you have submitted
>     comments/contributions related to preamble?
>
>     Here is a summary of the last CC. I apologize that it takes longer
>     than usual to get this back to you, I also had to catch the deadline.
>
>     Attendees: due to a larger number of participants, I only captured
>     the company names here.
>
>     Adacom, Alvarion; Beceem; Broadband Mobile Technologies; ETRI;
>     Hanaro Telecom; Hexagon; Intel; KT; LGE; Motorola; Nortel; TI;
>     Proxim; Qualcomm; Runcom; SOLiD Technologies; Samsung; Sprint; ZTE
>
>     We discussed the following items:
>
>     1. Status update of sequence harmonization
>
>     Jeff took an action to evaluate various sequence performance in
>     terms of PAPR, cross correlation, complexity. He indicated that
>     the results on PAPR and cross correlation were reported in two
>     previous contributions:
>     http://wirelessman.dyndns.org/cgi-script/CSUpload//upload/temp%252edb/80216e_Comments_on_Preamble_Design.ppt
>     and
>     http://wirelessman.dyndns.org/cgi-script/CSUpload//upload/temp%252edb/80216e%2d04_PreambleAdhoc_temp001.pdf.
>     If you have not read the documents and are interested in the
>     results, please review them before the next CC. Please voice your
>     opinions whether you agree the evaluation. Jeff also mentioned
>     that there were not enough Email discussions, I encourage people,
>     especially those with contributions, get discussion going.
>
>     There was a discussion on complexity: what is the threshold? Jeff
>     indicated that he does not have enough details on the process of
>     synchronization and cell search using the current preamble design.
>     Zion gave an explanation. Jeff needed more details. Zion and Jeff
>     agreed to have an offline discussion on the details.
>
>     The original assumption on sequence evaluation is that it will be
>     done in parallel of structure design. However, Sriram pointed it
>     out that the complexity evaluation depends on the structure
>     design. We ended it up to proceed to the agenda item 2.
>
>     Anand presented the idea of time domain sequence for
>     synchronization rather than frequency domain sequence. There was a
>     long discussion on this. Naftali requested to have a straw poll on
>     the time domain sequence, no one supported the proposal.
>
>     People agreed to continue the sequence harmonization in the coming
>     week.
>
>     2. Status update of the draft proposal on preamble structure
>
>     Wen updated the proposal based on the agreement of Aug. 13's CC.
>
>     Zion raised the issue on the "common Sync symbol is mandatory for
>     BS". He said that he was temporary dropped out of the call during
>     the Aug. 13 CC, therefore missed that part of discussion. Avi also
>     asked to clarification on "minatory" after I sent the meeting
>     summary. Several other members stated that "common Sync symbol"
>     must be mandatory to be useful. This issues was not resolved
>     during the meeting.
>
>     Wonil raised the issue on OMI support and using fixed location for
>     the common sync symbol. The current thinking is to use it as post
>     amble. Some members thought that from post amble, it is not always
>     possible to know the exact location of legacy preamble without
>     further search in the TDD mode. Everyone agrees that it is better
>     to use the fixed location, we need to find a good position.
>
>     Due to these issues raised and the time limitation, I recommended
>     that we do not submit the proposal as the ad-hoc harmonized
>     contribution, rather as a joint proposal. We agreed to continue
>     the ad-hoc discussion and update it in the reply comment,
>     hopefully by then, we can reach the consensus.
>
>     3. Next CC
>
>     We did not have time to set up another CC. I propose two options here:
>
>     Option 1: one CC on Monday Aug. 23 --- 7:00-9:00 am USA pacific
>     time, 11 pm for Seoul, 5 pm for TelAviv, 10 am for Ottawa
>
>     Option 2: one CC on Thursday Aug. 26 -- 20:00-22:00 USA pacific
>     time, 12:00 for Seoul, 6:00 for TelAviv, 23:00 for Ottawa
>
>     This leaves us another slot on Monday morning if needed.
>
>     Please let me know your preference.
>
>     The conference bridge is:
>
>     1+(613)7650160
>     Pass code: 3958089#
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Peiying
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Zhu, Peiying [CAR:DP13:EXCH]
>     Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 10:33 PM
>     To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
>     Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] [PREAMBLE] Aug 16 Preamble Ad-Hoc group
>     CC rem inder
>
>         Dear All:
>
>         This is a reminder for today's CC.
>
>         Monday, Aug 16 --- 20:00-22:00 USA pacific time, 12:00 for
>         Seoul, 6:00 for TelAviv, 23:00 for Ottawa
>
>         The conference bridge is:
>
>         1+(613)7650160
>         Pass code: 3958089#
>
>         Proposed agenda:
>
>         1. Discuss sequence harmonization
>
>         2. Status update of the draft proposal on preamble structure.
>
>         Regards,
>
>         Peiying
>
>
>