Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802.19] LAA Liaison

G’day Steve

 

Thanks for the comments

 

I have uploaded a v05 that includes

·         Cover letter

·         Notes flagging your comments

·         In a couple of cases I just implemented your suggestion

·         In others I disagree and so flagged them

 

Andrew

 

From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, 16 March 2016 5:35 PM
To: STDS-802-19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.19] LAA Liaison

 

Andrew,

 

I went through your document and put together a few comments.

 

Regards,

Steve

-----------

Comments

I recommend that prior to the vote you indicate who are the recipients of the liaison.
For reference the previous liaisons can be found at http://ieee802.org/Communications.shtml

 

Item 1

  • When energy detection is used to determine if the channel is busy, then energy in the channel is the only way I know of to reserve the channel.  Now of course any method of reserving the channel could be considered a method of blocking others from using the channel.
  • You may want to consider changing “blocking others from using the channel” to “reserving the channel”
  • I would agree that this is likely less efficient than a short packet to reserve the channel, but it serves the same purpose.  So it is really an efficiency issue.

 
Item 4

  • I recommend when you talk about aligning you clarify that it is time alignment to which you are referring.  In the next item mention alignment again, but there it refers to frequency alignment.  I think it would be good to be clear in the text.

 
Item 5

  • Here you again talk about aligning.  This time it is frequency alignment.  I suggest you be more precise and call it “frequency alignment”

 
Item 9

  • When you say “a high percentage” are you referring to a high percentage of NACKs?
  • It seems when there is a high percentage then the window is increased.  I do not see what problem you are trying to describe.  Are you talking about a percentage of NACKs below 80% but still “high?”

 
Item 10

  • I personally do not see the confusion here.  The text says to increase the window for each p in the set {1, 2, 3, 4}.  I read this as all the windows are increased.  What am I missing?