| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
All, Since we are talking about collaboration, coexistence,
802 and non 802 devices, are we not going to consider Incumbent protection, and security in
relation to all of these areas? It is hard to coexist without it, in my opinion. From:
whitespace@xxxxxxxx [mailto:whitespace@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Winston Caldwell Steve/Mark, While I had assumed that 802.19 might
focus only on 802, I didn’t mean to suggest – only to clarify for
myself. Thanks, Winston From:
whitespace@xxxxxxxx [mailto:whitespace@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shellhammer, Steve Mark,
Comments below. I think it will useful to discuss these further on
tomorrow’s call. Steve From: Mark Cummings
[mailto:markcummings@xxxxxxxxx] Steve, I proposed by email before the call, discussed on the call
and received support for including: 1.) Collaboration.
If coexistence is understood to include collaboration, then I am OK. SJS> My personal
opinion is that coexistence mechanisms could either include collaboration or
not, depending on the technique. So I am fine with collaborative
coexistence techniques. 2.) Use
Cases. If scenarios is understood to mean Use Cases, then I am OK. SJS> I am not sure if they are
the same or not. I think Use Cases are descriptions of how the networks
are used. I think information is useful in a coexistence scenario.
However, Use Cases can be separate when they focus on the utility of the
network, how it is used, what services are provided, etc. So if the focus
is more on how the networks are used and not specifically focused on how they
coexist, then I would consider this a separate topic. 3.) Non 802. If TV White Space Networks is understood to include
non 802 devices, then I am OK. SJS> To me
“TV white space networks” could include both 802 and non-802
network. However, Winston suggested that it be just 802 networks. Hope these clarifications are helpful, Mark Mark Cummings, Ph.D. +1 650 854 4406 Managing Partner,
enVia Technology Partners, Inc. Chair, Use Case Ad
Hoc, IEEE P1900.5 Special Member Board
of Directors SVC Wireless (Silicon Valley Member Special
Committee, Technical Committee of Software Radio, IEICE, On Apr 13, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Shellhammer, Steve wrote: All,
I currently have the following set of potential deliverables on TVWS
coexistence, · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence scenarios of TV white
space networks · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence metrics for measuring the
level of coexistence between TV white space networks · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence mechanisms for enhancing
coexistence between TV white space networks · An IEEE 802.19 document on harmonized mechanisms to protect
broadcast incumbents in TV white space Were any other
possible deliverables proposed on last week’s conference call? I will put together
a short straw poll on whether these should be Study Group deliverables.
Before I run the straw poll I just wanted to see if I should add any other
items to the list. Thanks, Steve From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxx] IEEE 802.19 TVWS
Coexistence SG,
I have been thinking about the best way to agree on a set of
deliverables. I recommend the following process. 1. Select a set of possible deliverables – This can be done
on next week’s conference call via email reflector 2. Straw poll each of the possible deliverables to see if there is
support for making it an actual deliverable – This can be done via email. I recommend on next
week’s conference call the SG develop the “List of possible
deliverables.” I will not be on the call so Ivan will run the call. Here are my
suggested deliverables, · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence scenarios of TV white
space networks · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence metrics for measuring the
level of coexistence between TV white space networks · An IEEE 802.19 document on coexistence mechanisms for enhancing
coexistence between TV white space networks On
next week’s call and via email please decide on any other
“potential deliverables.” I would expect all the deliverables
to be documents of one form or another, but someone may have another idea of a
good deliverable. Ivan or Mark can then email me any other potential deliverables. After
we have such a list I will run an email straw poll to see how much support
there is for each of these. This is just a straw poll so we need to think
about how much support is needed to decide that the SG wants to develop such a
deliverable. I will recommend that we only develop deliverables that
receive 75% support. If there is less support than that I would say that
development of such a document would be optional. I don’t want to
commit to developing something that has marginal support. Regards, Steve From: whitespace@xxxxxxxx [mailto:whitespace@xxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Shellhammer,
Steve All,
On tonight’s call we discussed the draft TVWS coexistence plan,
We will continue that discussion on next week’s conference call.
If you have comments on the plan you can also make those comments on the 802.19
email reflector. If you are not already on the email reflector you can
join here,
If you have comments on the plan please be specific regarding what changes you
would like to make to the document. You can recommend adding text,
changing text or removing text. Please specify what changes you would
recommend. That would enable others to comment on your recommended
changes. Regards, Steve |