| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Meeting Time: Thursday June 22, 2006 06:00 – 08:00 PDT Venue: conference call Minutes: - Please let me know if I’ve missed any participants. - The following minutes capture the major points of
discussion and agreement/disagreement. I did not attempt to capture
everybody’s statements/positions in the minutes. If I have omitted
anything significant, please let me know 1) Group
agreed to editorial changes to sections 3.3 adding a separate diagram and
clarifying the text and to section 3.4 (adding a figure to illustrate coverage
on a ferry). 2) Group
agreed to modification of section 5.3 to rewrite the sentence “It should
be noted that even when multiple routes are enabled between the RSs, the
overall topology is still tree-like because all data communications are between
the MMR-BS and MSs and this usage does not violate the scope as defined in the 802.16j
PAR.” to state that data communications are always between and MMR-BS and
an MS. 3) Group
agreed to mention in section 3.2 that the antennas of an in-building RS may be
mounted on the exterior of the building as well as on the interior. 4) Group
had agreed to mention that repeaters may be used to extend the range of MMR-BS
to RS links, but concern was voiced at the end of the meeting, so there is not
clear that there was concensus. The group will revisit this question in the
next meeting. 5) Group
agreed to include most of the proposed text describing military usage. The
following modifications/additions were agreed to: ·
Add a paragraph at
the front of the document stating that military scenarios are provided to show
how military usage benefits from commercial standardization. The military will
have special requirements in areas such as security and it is not intended that
802.16j address those specialized requirements. ·
Update text going
into section 3.4 to: -
clarify that the
relative speed between mobile RS and MS does not need to exceed maximum
mobility speeds supported in 802.16e -
modify the
sentences on MS -> RS -> MS communication to say that in some cases a
device may wish to implement both RS and BS functionality and to switch between
them in the even that communication with an upstream RS or MMR-BS is lost. Attendees: Dharma Basgeet - Toshiba Aik Chindapol – Siemens David Choukroun - Sequans Shulan Feng - Huawei I-Kang Fu - ITRI Heng-Iang Hsu – Institute for Information
Industry Kyeongsoo (Joseph) Kim - STMicroelectronics Yung-Ting Lee – Institute for Information
Industry Youn-Tai Lee -- Institute for Information Industry Sungjin Lee - Samsung
Matty Levanda -
Winetworks Kanchei (Ken) Loa – Institute for Information
Industry Shashikant Maheshwari - Nokia Greg Phillips - AirTegrity Wireless Arvind Raghavan - ArrayComm Shyamal Ramachandran -
motorola
Gamini Senarath - Nortel Matt Sherman - BAE Systems
Shiann-Tsang Sheu – Institute for Information
Industry
DJ Shyy – MITRE Seth.Spoenlein - US Army
Yong Sun - Toshiba
Jerry Sydir - Intel G.Q Wang – Nortel Haiguang Wang – I2R Jen-Shun Yang - ITRI Hua-Chiang Yin – Institute for Information Industry |