Re: [STDS-802-16] pusc DC index
Dear Bala
You are right.
I think this editorial already pointed out in this 16e BRC comment process. You may see the right
one in the next draft after the meeting.
Panyuh
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG [mailto:owner-stds-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of
balchand
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 8:36 PM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [STDS-802-16] pusc DC index
In table 308b of document P802.16e/D5a.pdf which describes the subcarrier allocations for 512-FFT
PUSC, is not the DC subcarrier index 256?
bala