| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear 16n members, On this matter, I am just putting a note below at this
moment. Since Backward Compatibility is mandatory, the 16m/16e
devices must be operable with the 16n network. In that sense, I am not
sure how following ideas of the baseline AWD
(C80216n-rg-11-0023r1.doc) meet such requirement. Any
advice or understanding of members would be appreciated. 1) In the Figure 247a and 249a, a
new symbol design is
illustrated for DL and UL each.
Those allocations of pilot
carrier and data
carrier look new and different
from those of 16m/16e. Now, how
can the 16m/16e devices
communicate with such 16n stations? Ref: -C80216n-rg-11-0010r1.pdf -C80216n-rg-11-0009r1.ppt 2) Now
Virtual superframe (4 superframes = 16 frames
/80ms) is going to
be defined. The
Virutual superframe seems to be a new concept, and the last frame of 16 frames
is special in a sense that contains SC beacon preamble and SC beacons. Even
with this unique cyclic structure, do the existing 16m/16e devices work as they
are now with the 16n network? Ref: - 802.16n-rg-11/0015.doc - 802.16n-11/0013r3.doc - 802.16n-11/0014r2.doc -802.16n-11/0015r3.doc Best regards, Fujimoto From: FujimotoKenichi
[mailto:fujimoto.kenichi@jrc.co.jp] Dear Sungcheol and All of 16n members, I have a general comment. Since I am just wondering to which category this
topic should be addressed, I have made it as [General]. That should be applied
to the all topics of Frame, PHY, Channels, MAC signaling, and all. All of the proposed ideas need to have Backward
compatibility with the 16e and 16m as defined in the SRD 5.1. Interoperability
with the 16e/m is required. But some of the proposed methods described in the
current baseline document (rg-11/0023r1) or proposed contributions seem not be
clear on this point. So, we should keep in mind it when discussing AWD. Thank you, Kenichi FUJIMOTO From: Sungcheol Chang
[mailto: Dear 16n participants, This is a kick-off mail for e-mail discussion on
Usages and Frame Structure for direct communication I suggest discussion guidelines as the followings: - The subject of all the e-mails begins with the tag “[STDS-802-16] [802.16n][DC]” because DC RG has one e-mail discussion
group now. - Reply mails are expected to be within 24 hours
because participants have different time zones. - Any participants can add technical discussion issues
for DC usage scenarios ad DC frame structure only. [STDS-802-16] [802.16n][DC][Usage] Discussion on Usage
Scenarios There are three scenarios of direct communication (Let’s focus on two HR-MSs at first) 1) Two HR-MSs under HR-BS coverage 2) One HR-MS under HR-BS coverage and The other HR-MS
out of HR-BS coverage. (HR-MS forwarding) 3) Two HR-MSs in absent of HR-BS [STDS-802-16] [802.16n][DC][Frame] Discussion on Frame
Structure Two cases of frame structure for direct communication 1) 16 frame structure including infrastructure frame
structure and relay frame structure. 2) DC specific frame structure including dedicated
resource usage (Zone) Two cases of DC resource separation within 16 frame
structure 1) TDM separation (Wideband approach) 2) FDM separation (Narrowband approach) Note) Base on this kick-off e-mail, 16n participants
concerning direct communication are encouraged to join this e-mail discussion
actively. Note) If participants want, participants can trigger
e-mail discussion on other topic freely. Please use the other tag! (DC RG is
not authorized to manage e-mail discussion among participants from 16n TG) Best regards, Sungcheol Chang |