Re: [STDS-802-16] turbo-codes and subchannelization

Your second interpretation is the appropriate one. And if you think IP, your scheduling mechanism will anyway allocate time and capacity to forward data blocks larger then the minimum code block.

Regards

===============================

Ofer Kelman

Airspan Networks (Israel) Ltd.

E-mail: okelman@airspan.com

Tel: +972-3-977-7550

Mobile: +972-54-4248359

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-16@listserv.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Ambroise Popper
Sent: 13 October, 2004 4:51 PM
To: STDS-802-16@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [STDS-802-16] turbo-codes and subchannelization

In the 802.16-2004 OFDM PHY, turbo-codes have been extended to support uplink subchannelization. A minimum block size is defined both in BTC (96 bits) and CTC (48 bits).

How do you accomodate this with the use of a small number of subchannels?

A first interpretation would be that you cannot use turbo-codes with a small number of subchannels (for instance in BTC QPSK 1/2, you can only support 4 or 8 subchannels to reach the minimum block size of 96 bits).

A second interpretation is that you must code over several OFDM symbols to reach desired block size (for instance in BTC QPSK 1/2 with one used subchannel, a coded block is necessarily a multiple of 4 symbols).

Best regards,

Ambroise Popper

tel : +33 1 44 89 48 11

cell : +33 6 60 63 57 20

SEQUANS Communications

101-103 bld Mc Donald, 75019 Paris, France

tel : +33 1 44 89 48 07

fax : +33 1 44 89 48 06