| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Adrian,
Glad to hear that IEEE 802.19 is one of your priorities :)
I guess there are several ways that 802.19 and 802.11n can work together on this topic.
First, let me clarify some terminology. Different people use the term coexistence differently. Generally speaking those of us within 802.19 (some of which came from 802.15.2) tend to refer to coexistence between dissimilar systems which are implementations of different standards. Since 802.11n is a supplement to 802.11 and is actually part of the 802.11 standard, I personally would not refer to 802.11n coexistence with other 802.11 systems. I think most of us in 802.19 would say that is a fundamental aspect of the 802.11 medium access control method (i.e. the MAC). We would use the term coexistence when referring to sharing of a common frequency band with a system which implements a different standard (e.g. 802.11n and 802.15.3, if 802.11n was to utilize the 2.4 GHz ISM band).
One thing we could do is to modify the 802.19 agenda for Vancouver to include a one-hour discussion on 802.19 suggestions to 802.11n on what to include in its requirements document on coexistence. We would likely include a similar session in March since my guess is that we would not agree on everything the first time.
Should I modify the agenda to include such a session?
Steve
_____________________________ Steve Shellhammer Intel Corporation (858) 391-4570 stephen.j.shellhammer@intel.com
-----Original Message-----
Hello Steve,
I have been attending 802.19 as a second priority to 802.11 TGn in order to keep the TGn coexistence issues and requirements (FRCC) under scrutiny by 802.19. I have copied this reflector with TGn FRCC meeting anouncements and document anouncements.
The first order of work for TGn FRCC will be to complete the consideration of the comparison criteria - of which there are about 80. Some of these relate explicitly to coexistence.
While we probably have a good handle on 802.11 - 802.11 coexistence issues in our comparison criteria, there is nothing explicitly to address the coexistence of heterogenous systems.
I am open to proposals as to how to work at this session to address this shortcoming. However, I expect that 802.19 needs to address its internal issues as a priority at this meeting.
However, if the FRCC does not complete its work at the next session, it may be worth discussing with you how 802.19 and FRCC can interact to take 802.19 input up to the following session.
Having said that, I think the most likely engagement we will have is post the TGn selection process where 802.19 defines coexistence issues to be considered, evaluated and documented by 802.11n.
Comments?
Best Regards,
|