IEEE 802.18 RR-TAG Teleconference Plan and Agenda

1. IEEE 802.18 RR-TAGTeleconference Plan and Agenda • Date:2016-10-06 Authors: Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

2. Agenda • Review and approve the agenda • Discussion items • Regulatory work in progress • Status of completed work • Actions required • None • AOB and Adjourn Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise Agenda

3. Administrative Items • Required notices • Affiliation FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html • Anti-Trust FAQ - http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf • Ethics - http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs/about/CoE_poster.pdf • IEEE 802 Policies and Procedures - http://www.ieee802.org/devdocs.shtml • Officers • Chair is Rich Kennedy (HP Enterprise) • Vice-chair is Jay Holcomb (Itron) Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

4. Other Guidelines for IEEE WG Meetings • All IEEE-SA standards meetings shall be conducted in compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust and competition laws. • Don’t discuss the interpretation, validity, or essentiality of patents/patent claims. • Don’t discuss specific license rates, terms, or conditions. • Relative costs, including licensing costs of essential patent claims, of different technical approaches may be discussed in standards development meetings. • Technical considerations remain primary focus • Don’t discuss or engage in the fixing of product prices, allocation of customers, or division of sales markets. • Don’t discuss the status or substance of ongoing or threatened litigation. • Don’t be silent if inappropriate topics are discussed… do formally object. • --------------------------------------------------------------- • If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at patcom@ieee.org or visit http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/index.html • See IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual, clause 5.3.10 and “Promoting Competition and Innovation: What You Need to Know about the IEEE Standards Association's Antitrust and Competition Policy” for more details. • This slide set is available at https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/slideset.ppt Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

5. Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise Discussion Items ETSI Updates CPG PT-D Report RE Directive Concerns

6. ETSI Updates • ERM TG11 • EN300 328 (2.4 GHz band) • In final approval stage (NB review) • Will be published in December of March • Next version planning underway • BRAN • EN 301 893 (5 GHz bands) • Test procedures still under discussion • Plan to complete and send to first ENAP stage end of November • Publication before RED deadline in doubt • EN 302 567 (60 GHz band) • In final editing • To be complete at November BRAN meeting Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

7. CPG PT-D Report • Expected Outcomes from the First CPG-19 PT-D • Tangible • PT-D Chairman’s Report to WP5A • “CEPT Briefs” for each of the agenda items • Preliminary positions • Intangible • An understanding of the National Administrations’ positions • Alignment of sides on the issues • Anti-RLAN • Pro-RLAN • Apparent neutrals • Introduction of the debating points that we will have to be able to counter • Basis for preparation for the next meetings Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

8. Agenda Item 1.16 Preliminary Positions Adopted • 5150-5350 MHz band: “CEPT would support relaxing the access conditions applicable to WAS/RLANs, if results of studies show that sharing and compatibility can be achieved with EESS, radars, MSS feeder links, aeronautical radionavigation and aeronautical telemetry (see RR footnote 5.446C)” • 5350-5470 MHz band: “CEPT opposes any new allocation to the mobile service with a view to accommodating WAS/RLAN use unless the mitigation techniques (such as DFS for radars) can be shown to provide co-existence with EESS (all types of sensors) and compatibility with all radio determination systems (including Meteorological Radars), taking into account their feasibility (including real implementation at international level) and effectiveness” • 5725-5850 MHz band: “CEPT would support a new mobile allocation to accommodate WAS/RLANs use if sharing and compatibility studies can demonstrate the effectiveness of new proposed interference mitigation techniques to ensure the protection of radars, fixed service (see RR footnote 5.455) [road-tolling systems] and FSS uplinks” • 5850-5925 MHz band: “CEPT is still in discussion over its initial preliminary position for this band, taking into account the need to not impose any additional constraints on existing services such as FSS and mobile service and its applications” Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

9. Other Pertinent Agenda Items • On WRC-19 Agenda item 1.12 (spectrum for ITS), CEPT CPG PT-D adopted following preliminary positions: • use of the bands 5855 - 5925 MHz for ITS should be investigated further with the view to a possible harmonization measure at ITU level, noting that ITS is allocated under the primary mobile service within CEPT on a non-exclusive basis and ITS devices cannot claim protection from FSS earth stations; • use of the bands 63 - 64 GHz for ITS should be investigated further with the view to a possible harmonization measure at ITU level, noting that ITS is allocated under the primary mobile service within CEPT and that ITS devices cannot claim protection from Radiolocation systems • development of ITS should not impose additional constraints on incumbent services to which these bands of radio frequencies have been allocated • On WRC-19 Agenda item 9.1.5, CEPT CPG PT-D adopted following preliminary positions: • no substantive agreement towards CEPT position Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

10. Other Observations • The UK input for 1.16 was argued vociferously for most of the Wednesday session, and heavily edited, led by the Russian Federation, Luxembourg, France, Germany, Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland and others, careful to ensure that none of it would have any impact on the satellite interests status quo • The Russian delegate specifically said, “With all due respect to my RLAN colleagues, we would be very happy if you just went away.” He quoted Karl Marx in regards to what he called the RLAN community’s capitalistic aims (ignoring our value for the proletariat) • It is clear to me that the National Administrations currently hold all (or at least most of) the cards. Working in concert with EUMETNET, EUMETSAT, ESA and Bosch, they are in a position to dominate the consensus-driven organization • UK is clearly trying to help the RLAN community, and Germany seems to be mostly neutral, but we are in the minority. However, as a consensus-driven organization,a vocal enough minority can still force some degree of compromise • The Transfinite satellite studies were not discussed (yet), and the satellite folks reacted noisily to the characterization of their studies of potential impact of RLANs as overly conservative, prompting a statement that interference will cause airplanes to crash, blood to be spilled Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

11. RE Directive Concerns • The transition has already started • RED in effect as of June 13, 2016 • R&TTE expires June 12, 2017 • After June 2017, all devices must meet the RED requirements, i.e. R&TTE certifications during the transition must be re-certified • Following the deadline, ALL equipment to be placed on the EU market must meet the RED provisions • If EN 301 893 is not published in time, Notified Bodies will be employed to enable shipment Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

12. Actions Required • None this week Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise

13. Any Other Business • Next meeting: October 28th at 3:00pm ET. • I am traveling to Madrid for WFA next week • WFA meeting the week after Rich Kennedy, HP Enterprise