| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi John,
I noticed on your spreadsheet that the section on block size is
due to be closed. However, several of my comments on spectral
efficiency are also applicable to the issue of block size. It
seems that there are still several differing opinions on the
block/channel requirements. This issue was also addressed in the
Albuquerque meeting by Lucent (contribution #105) and also by
Sprint (contribution #112r1).
I am still unclear whether or not the block sizes indicated
(e.g. 1.25 MHz and 5 MHz) include the necessary guard bands. For
example, if a block size of 5 MHz is used does this mean that I
can deploy this system in a 5 MHz licensed spectrum block such
as the US PCS D, E, and F blocks or the C and D blocks in the
recently announced Advanced Wireless Services spectrum ? If so,
then clearly this 5 MHz block must include the guardbands. Or, does
this mean the the actual RF carrier is intended to occupy the entire
5 MHz wide and extra guard bands will be needed?
What about 1.25 MHz blocks? Does this mean the actual RF carrier
bandwidth is 1.25 MHz or does the 1.25 MHz block already include
guard bands?
If block size is used in the calculation of spectral efficiency,
then it should be done in a consistent way. Either use a block size
that includes the guard bands or use the applicable RF carrier
bandwidth and include a definition of how carrier bandwidth is
calculated.
Best regards,
David Shively
-----Original Message-----
From: Humbert, John J [NTWK SVCS] [mailto:JHumbe01@sprintspectrum.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:06 PM
To: stds-80220-requirements@ieee.org
Subject: stds-80220-requirements: Requirements doc status 11_12_03.xls
Attached is an excel spreadsheet showing the status of each section.
There are a number of sections that are pending closure because they
were discussed at the Plenary meeting or there has been no activity for
more than 5 days.
<<Requirements doc status 11_12_03.xls>>