I am concerned about
the following text at the end of section 5.1:
It is, therefore, recommended that the future CTG work with
the requirements CG to make sure this
requirement be clearly reflected in the requirements
document.
My first concern is that the CTG, which would
be formed after its PAR is approved, couldn't come into
being
until March 2004 at the earliest. I truly hope that
the Requirements CG would have completed its work
before then, at least for the first release of the
802.20 standard. My second concern is that the requirements
document is being cast as if it imposes requirements on operators and
vendors. It doesn't. The requirements document establishes requirements for the air
interface. With respect to the regulatory requirements, they are
market-dependent and band-dependent.
So, it's not clear to me what meaningful requirement could be established
without knowledge of the specific bands and their associated regulatory
requirements. We could replace
the above text with the following:
It is, therefore, recommended that
the Requirements CG take into consideration the need
for
802.20 systems to meet
specific regulatory requirements in the market in which they
are
deployed.
Personally, I expect folks to
say, "No kidding. Doesn't this go without saying." Hence, my
preference would be to delete the sentence
altogether.
Best regards,
Joanne
-----Original Message----- From:
owner-stds-80220-coexistence@majordomo.ieee.org
[mailto:owner-stds-80220-coexistence@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of
Reza Arefi Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:55
PM To: 802. 20 Coex CG (E-mail) Subject:
stds-80220-coexistence: Revision 2 of the Coexistence CG recommendation to the
WG
Folks,
I am attaching revision 2 of our
document to this email. Blue text is what we have agreed to. There is also
some new text that you would need to have "track changes" activated to see it.
We don't have any more conference calls so please submit your comments (and
responses to others' comments) to the reflector no later than midnight (EST)
on Friday 11/7/03. I am planning to submit the document on Saturday.
A few points:
1. I included Al's text related to
equipment characteristics in section 4.1. I believe that this section and
section 5.5, however, are covering the same thing; input required for the
coexistence work. I propose that we combine these two sections under 5.5.
Please let me know if you have any objection.
2. I have added MSWord comments for
new text stating who the text is from. You need to activate "View ->
Comments" to be able to see them.
3. For the sake of clarity and
structure of the document I put the two differing viewpoints on 5.2 into an
appendix.