Re: [STDS-802-16] PAR Scope for M2M

[Vladimir Yanover <vladimir.yanover@ALVARION.COM>]

Ron and All,

I think the amendment PAR must specifically point to the standard revision to be amended which will be I believe 802.16-2009 as amended [by completion of the 16m project] by 802.16m.

I support the Rakesh's proposal to limit the extension to software-only features. We can argue about the language in the PAR.

Vladimir

 

---

From: Ron Murias [mailto:ron@MURIAS.CA]
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:02 PM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] PAR Scope for M2M

 

Hi Rakesh (and all),

 

I think the Scope needs more clean-up, with some recommendations included below in green.  While I won't comment on your PHY sentence, the wording is not consistent with what should be written in the Scope, especially wording like "can be considered", so I think that if the group agrees with the concept you are promoting, the sentence should be re-written (in line with my recommended text in green).

 

Thanks,

Ron

 

 

On 2010-04-28, at 3:31 AM, Rakesh Taori wrote:

Jose and all,

Thank you Jose, Hangyo and Shilpa for preparing the documents and organizing the discussions.

We would like to share some remarks on the
(a) PAR language in the PAR & 5C document (0003r1)
(b) the "MAC/PHY impact" sections of the SG report (0002r4)
We will try and upload documents with comments on both of these. In this e-mail, I would just like to focus on the PAR language and would be grateful if you could review and consider our changes during the discussion in CC #5.

=== Suggested Changes to the PAR language ===
This standard amends This amendment proposes enhancements to the IEEE 802.16 Advanced Air Interface to provide for enabling Machine to Machine (M2M) Communications between an M2M capable IEEE 802.16 subscriber station M2M device and IEEE 802.16 base station. It proposes limited extensions to the OFDMA PHY and MAC layers to support the unique requirements of M2M communications. PHY modifications that are required for implementing the unique requirements of M2M communications, but do not impact the frame structure, DL/UL physical structure and DL/UL control structure, can be considered.

This amendment provides support for IEEE 802.16m AAI equipment.  Backward compatibility with IEEE 802.16m specification legacy OFDMA equipment is maintained.
========

As you can see, the key change that we are proposing is further refinement of the PHY scope.
Our main concern is HW impact. Any alternative language that explicitly addresses the HW change concern would be welcome also.

I am guessing that our changes, other than the PHY sentence, are likely to be acceptable to most people.

Thanks and Kind Regards,
Rakesh
  _____  

From: Puthenkulam, Jose P [mailto:jose.p.puthenkulam@INTEL.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 4:23 PM
To: STDS-802-16@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16] 802.16 Project Planning Committee: M2M CC#4 Update - PAR Scope Discussion Summary + CC#5 bridge details again


Dear 802.16 M2M Fans,
 
I’ve uploaded the M2M Study Report 802.16ppc-10/0002r4 that is a result of the discussions from CC#4. Thanks to HanGyu Cho and all the contributors to make this possible.

 
http://dot16.org/ul//upload/ppc_db/80216ppc-10_0002r4.doc
 
I’ve also uploaded a M2M PAR and 5C initial working draft revised from the one we had earlier as place holder. It is 802.16ppc-10/0003r1. This also includes the text proposed by Shilpa Talwar based on some offline discussions we asked her to carry out after CC#4 to generate some initial text.  I’ve also filled out the rest of the PAR form and 5C as first cut for review on the call tomorrow. This document is just an input for discussion at this point. Hope is to get a consensus version after the call tomorrow.

 
http://dot16.org/ul//upload/ppc_db/80216ppc-10_0003r1.doc
 
The final version of the PAR & 5C and also the Study report will only be finalized during the May meeting. These are draft documents we are preparing for discussion in the May meeting.

 
Thanks & BR,
jose
 

 

************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(190).
************************************************************************************


************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(42).
************************************************************************************

************************************************************************************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(42).
************************************************************************************