1 / 11

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Comment resolutions for PICS] Date Submitted: [January, 2011] Source: [Kunal Shah] Company [Silver Spring Networks] Address [] Voice: [], FAX: [], E-Mail: [kshah@silverspringnet.com]

zuri
Télécharger la présentation

Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Comment resolutions for PICS] Date Submitted: [January, 2011] Source:[Kunal Shah] Company [Silver Spring Networks] Address [] Voice: [], FAX: [], E-Mail: [kshah@silverspringnet.com] Re: [] Abstract: [This document provides resolutions to comments for PICS] Purpose: [This document provides resolutions to comments of LB59] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.

  2. Summary This document describes the proposed resolution on the comments related to the definition of frequency deviation. The following comments are addressed: CID# 378, 108, 110, 112, 113, 166, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 379, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 556, 557, 558, 559, 606, 630, 740, 1029, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063

  3. Comments and proposed resolutions CID #110: Why is RF8.1 status = FD1&FD6:M? Is it also not mandatory that a reduced function SUN device support operating mode #1? Proposed change: Change to FD6:M Proposed Resolution: Accept in principle. Change "FD1 & FD6: M" to "FD6: M"

  4. CID #112:For MF5, receiver status should be FD6:M Proposed Resolution: Accept CID #113: For MF5, receiver status should be FD6:M Proposed Resolution: Accept in principle. Change the receiver status from M to "FD1 and FD6:M" CID #166:The PICS are confusing and not clear. Proposed Resolution: CID #173: PICS imply a device that supports solely modes of the Generic PHY is compliant. Proposed change: Replace Status of RF 7.5 with "RF 7.2: O" Proposed Resolution: Accept in principle. Resolved as per comment #475

  5. CID #174: The PICS make it ambiguous as to whether one or all of the bands in Table 75a need to be supported. Proposed change: Only one band needs to be supported by a SUN compliant device. Write the bands out individually or at least fix the wording to state "Operating mode #1 in one of the bands…" Proposed Resolution: AP. Change RF8.1 - "Operating mode #1 in bands defined in Table 75a" to "Operating mode #1 in one of the bands defined in table 75a" CID #175: References in Status of RF15.2, RF16 are also incorrect. Proposed change: Refer to RF7.4 and RF7.3 respectively. Proposed Resolution: Accept in principle. Change RF15.2 status to RF7.4:M and change RF16 status to RF7.3: O CID #176: RF15.1 is incorrect. Proposed change: Change "Item description" to "Support for all BPSK and QPSK modes". Change Status to "RF7.4:M". Proposed Resolution: Accept

  6. CID #177: Status fields of RF8.3 and RF8.5 are incorrect. First, the features apply only to SUN devices. Then, not all SUN devices are required to support them unless operating in those bands. Even then, the particular FSK modes are not mandatory for all devices in the 950 MHz band. Proposed change: Added FD6 dependency to Status field. Make additional changes as needed. Proposed Resolution: AP. For RF8.3 - Change description "Operating mode #2 in the 470 MHz band" to "Operating mode #2 when operated in 470 MHz band". Change status to FD6: MFor RF8.5 - Change description "Operating mode #1 and #2 in 950 MHz band" to "Operating mode #1 and #2 when operated in 950 MHz band". Change status to FD6: M

  7. CID #474: RF7.2 should have a status of FD1 and FD6:M Proposed Resolution: AP. Change status "FD6: O.9 RF7.1: M" to "FD6: M" and change the status of RF7.3 and RF7.4 to O Resolved as per doc#903r2 and comment#954 CID #475: The moniker O.9 is used for RF7.5 and should be differentiated from RF7.2-RF7.4 otherwise a compliant system may support ONLY the MR-FSK Generic PHY - this is not intended. Proposed change: Use a different option label Proposed Resolution: AP. As Generic PHY applies to MR-FSK mode. Change RF7.5 status from "FD6: O.9" to "RF7.2: O"

  8. CID #476: Text implies that one must support the operating mode #1 in ALL of the bands in Table 75a Proposed change: Enumerate the bands as their own line items Proposed Resolution: AP. Resolved as per comment# 174 CID #477: RF14 appears correct in syntax making reference in its subclauses to RF7.2 and RF7.5. RF15, then, should reference RF7.4 not FD6 in its subclauses. Proposed Resolution: AP. Change status for RF15.1 - "FD6: M" to "RF7.4:M" andRF15.2 - resolved as per comment# 175 CID #556: Missing the 863-870 MHz band Proposed change: Add 863-870 MHz band Proposed Resolution: AP. 863 is part of RF8. No change required.

  9. CID #559: The Item description of RF15.1 is not correct with respect to the definition in 6.12b.1. Proposed change: Change to MCS0-MSC3 for option 1, MCS0-MSC4 for option 2, MCS1-MSC4 for option 3 and MCS2-MSC4 for option 4. Proposed Resolution: AP. Resolved as per comment# 176 CID #606: In Table D.4, the status of RF16 should be "FD6: O" instead of "FD5: O". Proposed change: Change "FD5: O" to "FD6: O" Proposed Resolution: AP. Resolved as per comment #175 CID #630: Several modes are given status M although support for the frequency bands is not M Proposed change: Check consistency of the status values – make conditional on support of the corresponding frequency bands Proposed Resolution: AP. Add another row: Support for at least one of the bands given in table 1 or 75a" and status FD6:M

  10. CID #1029: RF7.5 is not a PHY Proposed change: Remove Proposed Resolution: Accept in principle. The status of RF7.5 is changed to RF7.2:O Resolved as per comment#475. CID #1060: Status of RF7.6 in Table D.4 is not complete conditions. Proposed change: Replace with "FD1 & FD6 & MLF15“. Or simply "O". Proposed Resolution: AP. Change "FD1 & FD6: M" to “FD1, FD6 and MLF15:M" CID #1061: Status of RF7.6 in Table D.4 is not complete conditions concerning 2.4GHz spread spectrum rules. Proposed change: Replace with "FD1 & FD6 & MLF15 & not(RF2)“. Or simply "O". Proposed Resolution: Reject. FD6 excludes RF2 (2450 O-QPSK PHY) and it is mandatory only for devices that are both FFD and SUN PHY devices.

  11. CID #1062: Status of RF7.6 in Table D.4 is not complete conditions concerning ECC spread spectrum rules. Proposed change: Maybe, FD1 & FD6 & MLF15 & not(RF2) & not(RF1.1) is better. Or simply "O". Proposed Resolution: Reject. FD6 excludes RF2 and RF1.1 and it is mandatory only for devices that are both FFD and SUN PHY devices. CID #1063: Item description in RF15 of "MR-OFDM operating modes" may be more adequate. Proposed change: Replace "MR-OFDM options" with "MR-OFDM operating modes" Proposed Resolution: Accept Open comments# 378, 108, 166 379, 473, 558, 559 and 740

More Related