Docstoc

PHY adhoc report

Document Sample
PHY adhoc report Powered By Docstoc
					November 2010                                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                 TGac PHY AdHoc Report
                                Date: 2010-11-08
Authors:
Name            Affiliations   Address               Phone         email
Vinko Erceg     Broadcom       San Diego             +1 858 521-   verceg@broadcom.com
                                                     5885
Raja Banerjea   Marvell        Santa Clara           +1 408 489    rajab@marvell.com
                                                     7129
Minho Cheong    ETRI           Daejeon, Korea        +82 42 860    minho@etri.re.kr
                                                     5635




Submission                                 Slide 1                      Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Abstract

 • Agenda, Minutes and Motions for the TGac PHY Ad
   Hoc since November 2009




Submission               Slide 2             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
  November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                  Important IEEE Links

• The following slides in this deck are believed to be the latest
  available however the Source locations are:
• http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html
• http://standards.ieee.org/resources/antitrust-guidelines.pdf
• http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt
• http://www.ieee.org/portal/cms_docs/about/CoE_poster.pdf

• For summary, see 11-07-0660-01-0000-opening-presentation
• Don’t forget attendance check during PHY AdHoc session.

  Submission                    Slide 3             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                    Member Affiliation

 • It is defined in the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws,
   5.2.1.5 as: ―An individual is deemed ―affiliated‖ with
   any individual or entity that has been, or will be,
   financially or materially supporting that individual’s
   participation in a particular IEEE standards activity.
   This includes, but is not limited to, his or her employer
   and any individual or entity that has or will have,
   either directly or indirectly, requested, paid for, or
   otherwise sponsored his or her participation.
 • http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html


Submission                       Slide 4                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Declaration of Affiliation

 • Revision: May 2007 Standards Board Bylaw 5.2.1.1
       – 5.2.1.1 Openness
             • Openness is defined as the quality of being not restricted to a
               particular type or category of participants. All meetings involving
               standards development an all IEEE Sponsor ballots shall be open toa
               all interested parties. Each individual participant in IEEE Standards
               activities shall disclose his or her affiliations when requested. A
               person who knows or reasonably should know, that a participant’s
               disclosure is materially incomplete or incorrect should report that fact
               to the Secretary of the IEEE-SA Standards Board and the appropriate
               Sponsors.
       – http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html



Submission                                 Slide 5                    Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                            Affiliation Policy
 • Requirement to declare affiliation at all standards
   development meetings and recorded in the minutes
    – Affiliation not necessarily same as employer
    – Declaration requirement may be familiar to some 802 WGs, though
       WG declaration process may evolve
 • 11. What if I refuse to disclose my affiliation?
       – As outlined in IEEE-SA governance documents, you will lose certain rights.
         In a working group where voting rights are gained through attendance, no
         attendance credit will be granted if affiliation isn’t declared. Similarly, voting
         rights are to be removed if affiliation isn’t declared.
 • Affiliation declaration will be added to Sponsor ballot
 • http://standards.ieee.org/faqs/affiliationFAQ.html




Submission                                Slide 6                    Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
Highlights of the IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on
                 Patents in Standards
– Participants have a duty to tell the IEEE if they know (based on personal awareness) of
  potentially Essential Patent Claims they or their employer own
– Participants are encouraged to tell the IEEE if they know of potentially Essential Patent
  Claims owned by others
    • This encouragement is particularly strong as the third party may not be a participant in the standards
      process
– Working Group required to request assurance
– Early assurance is encouraged
– Terms of assurance shall be either:
    • Reasonable and nondiscriminatory, with or without monetary compensation; or,
    • A statement of non-assertion of patent rights
– Assurances
    •   Shall be provided on the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved LOA form
    •   May optionally include not-to-exceed rates, terms, and conditions
    •   Shall not be circumvented through sale or transfer of patents
    •   Shall be brought to the attention of any future assignees or transferees
    •   Shall apply to Affiliates unless explicitly excluded
    •   Are irrevocable once submitted and accepted
    •   Shall be supplemented if Submitter becomes aware of other potential Essential Patent Claims
– A ―Blanket Letter of Assurance‖ may be provided at the option of the patent holder
– A patent holder has no duty to perform a patent search
– Full policy available at http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws/sect6-7.html#6                                   1
 Submission                                         Slide 7                           Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
  November 2010                                                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
             IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
6.2 Policy

 IEEE standards may be drafted in terms that include the use of Essential Patent Claims. If the IEEE receives
 notice that a [Proposed] IEEE Standard may require the use of a potential Essential Patent Claim, the IEEE shall
 request licensing assurance, on the IEEE Standards Board approved Letter of Assurance form, from the patent
 holder or patent applicant. The IEEE shall request this assurance without coercion.

 The Submitter of the Letter of Assurance may, after Reasonable and Good Faith Inquiry, indicate it is not aware
 of any Patent Claims that the Submitter may own, control, or have the ability to license that might be or become
 Essential Patent Claims. If the patent holder or patent applicant provides an assurance, it should do so as soon as
 reasonably feasible in the standards development process. This assurance shall be provided prior to the Standards
 Board’s approval of the standard. This assurance shall be provided prior to a reaffirmation if the IEEE receives
 notice of a potential Essential Patent Claim after the standard’s approval or a prior reaffirmation. An asserted
 potential Essential Patent Claim for which an assurance cannot be obtained (e.g., a Letter of Assurance is not
 provided or the Letter of Assurance indicates that assurance is not being provided) shall be referred to the Patent
 Committee.

 A Letter of Assurance shall be either:

  a) A general disclaimer to the effect that the Submitter without conditions will not enforce any present or future
     Essential Patent Claims against any person or entity making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing,
     distributing, or implementing a compliant implementation of the standard; or
  b) A statement that a license for a compliant implementation of the standard will be made available to an
     unrestricted number of applicants on a worldwide basis without compensation or under reasonable rates, with
     reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair discrimination. At its sole option, the
     Submitter may provide with its assurance any of the following: (i) a not-to-exceed license fee or rate
     commitment, (ii) a sample license agreement, or (iii) one or more material licensing terms.
                                                                                                                        2
  Submission                                           Slide 8                           Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                                              doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

              IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
Copies of an Accepted LOA may be provided to the working group, but shall not be discussed, at any standards
working group meeting.

The Submitter and all Affiliates (other than those Affiliates excluded in a Letter of Assurance) shall not assign or
otherwise transfer any rights in any Essential Patent Claims that are the subject of such Letter of Assurance that
they hold, control, or have the ability to license with the intent of circumventing or negating any of the
representations and commitments made in such Letter of Assurance.

The Submitter of a Letter of Assurance shall agree (a) to provide notice of a Letter of Assurance either through a
Statement of Encumbrance or by binding any assignee or transferee to the terms of such Letter of Assurance; and
(b) to require its assignee or transferee to (i) agree to similarly provide such notice and (ii) to bind its assignees or
transferees to agree to provide such notice as described in (a) and (b).

This assurance shall apply to the Submitter and its Affiliates except those Affiliates the Submitter specifically
excludes on the relevant Letter of Assurance.

If, after providing a Letter of Assurance to the IEEE, the Submitter becomes aware of additional Patent Claim(s)
not already covered by an existing Letter of Assurance that are owned, controlled, or licensable by the Submitter
that may be or become Essential Patent Claim(s) for the same IEEE Standard but are not the subject of an existing
Letter of Assurance, then such Submitter shall submit a Letter of Assurance stating its position regarding
enforcement or licensing of such Patent Claims. For the purposes of this commitment, the Submitter is deemed to
be aware if any of the following individuals who are from, employed by, or otherwise represent the Submitter have
personal knowledge of additional potential Essential Patent Claims, owned or controlled by the Submitter, related
to a [Proposed] IEEE Standard and not already the subject of a previously submitted Letter of Assurance: (a) past
or present participants in the development of the [Proposed] IEEE Standard, or (b) the individual executing the
previously submitted Letter of Assurance.
                                                                                                                            3
 Submission                                              Slide 9                            Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

      IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws on Patents in Standards
The assurance is irrevocable once submitted and accepted and shall apply, at a minimum, from the date of the
standard's approval to the date of the standard's withdrawal.

The IEEE is not responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for
conducting inquiries into the legal validity or scope of those Patent Claims, or for determining whether any
licensing terms or conditions are reasonable or non-discriminatory.

Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted as giving rise to a duty to conduct a patent search. No license is implied
by the submission of a Letter of Assurance.

In order for IEEE’s patent policy to function efficiently, individuals participating in the standards development
process: (a) shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of the holder of any potential Essential
Patent Claims of which they are personally aware and that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of
Assurance, owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise
represents; and (b) should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed) of any other holders of such
potential Essential Patent Claims that are not already the subject of an existing Letter of Assurance.




                                                                                                                         4
 Submission                                            Slide 10                           Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

             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 fixing product prices, allocation of customers, or dividing 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/board/pat/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 http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.ppt
                                                                                                                                          5
Submission                                                        Slide 11                                  Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Important Questions about Patents
• Are there any patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s)
  and/or the holder of patent claim(s)/patent application
  claim(s) that the participant believes may be essential for
  the use of that standard?

• Minute any responses that were given, specifically the
  patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s) and/or the
  holder of the patent claim(s)/patent application claim(s)
  that were identified (if any) and by whom.



 Submission                   Slide 12             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Ad Hoc Operating Rules (1/2)

 • 11ac selection procedure (11-09-0059r5)
 5.
       b. A straw poll result of >=75% is required within an Ad Hoc to
          approve the resolution of all or part of an issue and forward that
          resolved item to the Taskgroup where it becomes a motion that
          requires >=75% approval to modify the specification framework or
          the draft specification.
       c. In the case a consensus can not be reached within an Ad Hoc
          group (a stalemate that prohibits further progress), the subject is
          moved to the Taskgroup if an Ad Hoc straw poll vote to move the
          subject to the Taskgroup achieves >50% approval.


Submission                           Slide 13                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Ad Hoc Operating Rules (2/2)

       d. A motion passing with >50% in the Taskgroup shall be sufficient
          to move an issue previously assigned to an Ad Hoc group to any
          Ad Hoc group. A straw poll vote of >50% is required in an Ad
          Hoc group to refuse an issue from the Taskgroup.
       e. An issue may be sent from one Ad Hoc to another if both the
          sending Ad Hoc and the receiving Ad Hoc approve straw polls for
          taking the respective actions with >50% approval. A notice should
          be sent to the reflector indicating the approval of a straw poll to
          move an issue.
       f. To be accepted into the TGac Draft specification, proposals from
          Ad Hoc group require a motion that passes with >=75% Taskgroup
          approval


Submission                           Slide 14                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                          PHY AdHoc Topics
 • PHY AdHoc group discussion topics in document 11-09-
   1175-01-00ac-ad-hoc-groups-scope.ppt:
       –     Pilots
       –     Data tones
       –     Preamble
       –     Enhanced MCS
       –     Sounding
       –     Higher Bandwidth modulation
       –     Parsing and Interleaving
       –     Coding, STBC
       –     Spatial Mapping & Cyclic Delays
       –     Mask, Regulatory, ACI, Sensitivity, etc. - additional possible topics

Submission                               Slide 15                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0




             Running PHY AdHoc Agenda Pages




Submission                Slide 16             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Interpretive Guide – Text Coloring

 • Text coloring:
       –     Black = pending agenda item
       –     Red = item partially addressed
       –     Green = item completed
       –     Gray = item not addressed in the session indicated at the top of the
             slide




Submission                               Slide 17                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     TGac PHY Adhoc November 8 -11, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 18             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                           Submissions (1)
       –     11-10/1290r0 VHT SIG B in NDPs (Allert Van Zelst)
       –     11-10/1282r0 plcp-rx-procedure (Eldad Perahia)
       –     11-10/1264r1 160 MHz Stream Parser (Hongyuan Zhang)
       –     11-10/1279r0 Segment Parser for 160 MHz (Minho Cheong)
       –     11-10/1255r0 Tx Mask for Noncontiguous 160 MHz (Youhan Kim)
       –     11-10/1300r0 ldpc-for-11ac (Jun Zheng)
       –     11-10/1301r0 legacy-csd-table (Jun Zheng)




Submission                           Slide 19             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
• Monday AM1 (9:00-11:00)
    –   11-10/1282r0 plcp-rx-procedure (Eldad Perahia)
    –   11-10/1290r0 VHT SIG B in NDPs (Allert Van Zelst)
    –   11-10/1255r0 Tx Mask for Noncontiguous 160 MHz (Youhan Kim)
    –   11-10/1264r1 160 MHz Stream Parser (Hongyuan Zhang)
    –   11-10/1279r0 Segment Parser for 160 MHz (Minho Cheong)
    –   11-10/1300r0 ldpc-for-11ac (Jun Zheng)
    –   11-10/1301r0 legacy-csd-table (Jun Zheng)




 Submission                          Slide 20               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0




         Running TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes




Submission            Slide 21             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                 Strawpoll/Pre-Motion #1
• xy




 Submission                Slide 22             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                             Minutes Taking

 • Chairs/volunteers will take notes
 • Lever of detail recorded:
       –     Documents presented
       –     Action items and conclusions, if applicable
       –     Straw polls
       –     Other items, if applicable
       –     No Q&A will be recorded




Submission                              Slide 23               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                MONTH DAY, YEAR
 • Document xx presentation
 • Discussion related to yy
       – Outcome of the discussion: xx
 • Straw poll:
       – “ xx “
       – Outcome of the straw poll: YES/NO/ABS: xx/xx/xx




Submission                         Slide 24             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                       doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0




             TGac PHY AdHoc Agenda Pages
                From Previous Sessions




Submission               Slide 25             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Agenda for 19 November 2009
 •    Chair Introductions
 •    Scope of PHY AdHoc
 •    PHY AdHoc Operating Rules
 •    TGac Documents of Interest Review
       – 11-09-1167-00-00ac-tgac-ad-hoc-group-operation-and-chair-
         selection-procedure.pptx
       – 11-09-1181-00-00ac-ad-hoc-lifecycle.ppt
       – 11-09-1175-r0-00ac-AdHoc Groups Scope.ppt
 • Minutes Taking
 • Questions and Answers
 • Submissions

Submission                         Slide 26              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Activities Since Nov. 2009

 • PHY Adhoc calls scheduled on Dec. 3, 2009 and Jan.
   14, 2010 were cancelled due to lack of submission.




Submission                 Slide 27             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


 TGac PHY Adhoc Jan. 18- 21, 2010
 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 28             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                             Submissions


 • Preamble Presentations
    – “802.11ac Preamble” - 11-10-0070-00-00ac-802-11ac-preamble.ppt
       – “GroupID Concept for Downlink MU-MIMO Transmission” - 11-10-
         0073-00-00ac-group-id-concept-for-dl-mu-mimo.ppt
       – YungSzu Tu ?


 • Channel Models
       – “Measured Channel Variation and Coherence Time in NTT Lab” - 11-10-
         0087-00-00ac-measured-channel-variation-and-coherence-time-in-ntt-
         lab.ppt



Submission                           Slide 29                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week

• Tuesday Jan 19th, AM1                        • Wed Jan 20th, AM1
    – “802.11ac Preamble” - 11-10-
                                                    – “Proposed TGac Preamble” - 11-
      0070-00-00ac-802-11ac-                          10-0130-00-00ac-proposed-tgac-
      preamble.ppt                                    preamble.ppt
    – “GroupID Concept for Downlink
      MU-MIMO Transmission” - 11-                   – Straw Polls
      10-0073-00-00ac-group-id-
      concept-for-dl-mu-mimo.ppt
    – “Measured Channel Variation and
      Coherence Time in NTT Lab” -
      11-10-0087-00-00ac-measured-
      channel-variation-and-coherence-
      time-in-ntt-lab.ppt


 Submission                              Slide 30                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll on Numerology

 • Do you support adding the stream and station limits
   defined in ―11-10-0070r0 802.11ac preamble‖ to the
   spec framework using the edits to R3.2.1.D, R3.4.A,
   R3.4.B, R3.4.C and R4.D in ―11-10-0113r0 proposed
   spec framework edits for preamble structure and a-
   mpdu‖ and forward to the TGac Task Group?
       – Yes: 22
       – No: 16
       – Abs: 8




Submission                 Slide 31             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on Preamble Structure

 • Do you support adding the preamble structure defined
   in ―11-10-0070r0 802.11ac preamble‖ to the spec
   framework using the edits in section 3.2.1 of ―11-10-
   0113r0 proposed spec framework edits for preamble
   structure and a-mpdu‖?
       – Yes: 19
       – No: 13
       – Abs: 6




Submission                 Slide 32             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on Group ID Concept

 • Do you support adding a Group ID field to the VHT
   MU PPDU SIG field to support client side stream
   demultiplexing as described in ―11-10-0073r0 Group
   ID Concept for DL MU-MIMO‖?
       – Yes: 24
       – No: 8
       – Abs: 12




Submission                Slide 33             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Straw Poll on Numerology with TBD

 • Do you support adding the stream and station limits
   defined in ―11-10-0070r0 802.11ac preamble‖ to the
   spec framework using the edits to R3.2.1.D, R3.4.A,
   R3.4.B, R3.4.C and R4.D in ―11-10-0113r0 proposed
   spec framework edits for preamble structure and a-
   mpdu‖ with all numbers as TBD and forward to the
   TGac Task Group?
       – Yes: 36
       – No: 19
       – Abs: 1


Submission                 Slide 34             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Agenda for 10 February 2010 (Conf. Call)
 •    Affiliation policy (See slide 6)
 •    IEEE Patent policy review (See slide 7-10)
 •    Question of IP claims (See slide 12)
 •    Attendance recording
       –     Conf. call attendance required – send email to chairs
 •    Review rules for adhocs
       –     11-09-0059r5
 •    Level of detail of minutes
       –     Minutes document and Agenda ppt. both cover an 802.11 week plus teleconferences preceding that 802.11 meeting week
 •    11-09-1181-00-00ac-ad-hoc-lifecycle.ppt
 •    Determine chair sharing rules/procedures
       –     11-09-1167-00-00ac-tgac-ad-hoc-group-operation-and-chair-selection-procedure.pptx
       –     11-09-0059-04-00ac-802-11ac-proposed-selection-procedure.doc
 •    PHY topics (11-09-1175-01-00ac-ad-hoc-groups-scope.ppt)
       –     Pilots, Data tones, Preamble, Enhanced MCS, Sounding
       –     Higher Bandwidth modulation
       –     Parsing and Interleaving
       –     Coding, STBC
       –     Spatial Mapping & Cyclic Delays
       –     Mask, Regulatory, ACI, Sensitivity, etc. - additional possible topics
 •    Submissions
       –     802.11ac Preamble, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell) 11-10-0070r1




Submission                                                            Slide 35                               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     TGac PHY Adhoc March 15-18, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 36             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                Submissions

 •    Preamble Design
       – Preamble Minor Enhancement, Brian Hart (Cisco), 11-10-0316r1
       – 802.11ac Preamble for VHT Auto-detection, Il-Gu Lee (ETRI), 11-10-0359r0
       – Preamble Design Aspects for 11ac, Yujin Noh (LG), 11-10-0363r0
       – 802.11ac Preamble, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom), 11-10-0070r5
 •    Group ID Concept
       – MU-MIMO STA scheduling strategy and Related PHY signaling,Daewon Lee (LG),
         11-10-0362r2
       – Group ID Concept for DL MU-MIMO, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom), 11-10-0073r2
 •    VHT SIG Field Design
       – Bit Consideration for SIG Field, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom), 11-10-0382r1
 •    Tone Allocation
       – 80MHz Tone Allocation, Sudhir Srinivasa (Marvell), 11-10-0370r0


Submission                                Slide 37                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week

• Tuesday Mar. 16th, AM1                  • Wed Mar. 17th, AM1
                                               – 80MHz Tone Allocation, 11-10-
    – Preamble Minor Enhancement,                0370r0
      11-10-0316r1                             – MU-MIMO STA scheduling
    – 802.11ac Preamble for VHT Auto-            strategy and Related PHY
      detection, 11-10-0359r0                    signaling, 11-10-0362r2
                                               – Group ID Concept for DL MU-
    – Preamble Design Aspects for                MIMO, 11-10-0073r2
      11ac, 11-10-0363r0                       – Bit Consideration for SIG Field,
    – 802.11ac Preamble, 11-10-0070r5            11-10-0382r1




 Submission                         Slide 38                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                Straw Poll on Numerology
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support adding a basic guideline on the
   numerology for 11ac device described as in Section I of
   11-10/0070r4, excluding slide 9 (max Number of users
   for MU remains TBD), to the spec framework
   document, 11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 79
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 3

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                          Slide 39                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

             Straw Poll on Preamble Structure
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support adding the 11ac preamble structure
   with two SIGNAL fields (VHT-SIGA located before
   VHT-STF and VHT-SIGB located after VHT-LTFs) as
   in Section III (Slide 22) of 11-10/0070r4 to the spec
   framework document, 11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 70
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 16

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                          Slide 40                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

      Follow-up Straw Poll on Preamble Structure
                      (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support to have 2 OFDM symbols for VHT-
   SIGA and a single OFDM symbol for VHT-SIGB, and
   to edit the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
   accordingly?
       – Yes: 54
       – No: 22
       – Abs: 13

       – It fails to move to task group motion




Submission                           Slide 41              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                    Straw Poll on Spoofing
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support to have BPSK on the 1st VHT-SIGA
   symbol and 90-deg rotated BPSK (QBPSK) on the 2nd
   VHT-SIGA symbol for VHT auto-detection as in
   Section III (Slide 20) of 11-10/0070r4, and to edit the
   spec framework document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?
       – Yes: 54
       – No: 23
       – Abs: 8

       – It fails to move to task group motion


Submission                           Slide 42              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   Straw Poll on Spoofing II
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • ―Do you support to have BPSK on the 1st VHT-SIGA
   symbol and TBD on the 2nd VHT-SIGA symbol for
   VHT auto-detection, and to edit the spec framework
   document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?‖
       – Yes: 71
       – No: 1
       – Abs: 11

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission                          Slide 43                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

  Straw Poll on MU-MIMO STA Scheduling
                       (just informative)

 • Considering environments which MU-MIMO may have
   outstanding performances, do you agree to have
   further investigation on the grouping concept for MU-
   MIMO STA co-scheduling?

       – Yes: 35
       – No: 19
       – Abstain: 17




Submission                   Slide 44             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               Straw Poll on GroupID Field
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support adding the GroupID field to VHT-
   SIGA for 11ac preamble as in 11-10/0073r2, and
   editing the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
   accordingly?

       – Y: 34
       – N: 28
       – Abstain: 11

       – It fails to move to task group motion


Submission                           Slide 45              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

   Straw Poll on Bit Allocation in VHT-SIGs
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support including TBD bits for Bandwidth and
   STBC in VHT-SIGA and including MCS field in VHT-
   SIGB, and editing the spec framework document, 11-
   09-0992, accordingly?
       – Yes: 47
       – No: 5
       – Abs: 7

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission                          Slide 46                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   Straw Poll on MCS field
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support allowing only equal modulation and
   coding scheme across all streams per user and stating
   this in the spec framework document, 11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 44
       – No: 14
       – Abs: 15

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission                          Slide 47                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   Straw Poll on STBC bit
                   (intended to move to TG motion)

 • Do you support to have one bit to indicate STBC mode
   (Alamouti scheme) and to edit the spec framework
   document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?
       – Yes: 49
       – No: 18
       – Abs: 12

       – It fails to move to task group motion




Submission                           Slide 48              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        TGac PHY Adhoc May 17-20, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 49             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                              Submissions
       –     10/568r0 “Single User MCS Proposal”, Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       –     10/566r1 “Sounding and P Matrix”, Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       –     10/534r0, “Duration in L-SIG”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       –     10/548r0, “80MHz Transmission Flow”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       –     10/549r0, “TGac Preamble Auto Detection Comparisons”, Hongyuan
             Zhang (Marvell)
       –     10/550r0, “VHTSIG Considerations”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       –     10/370r1, “80MHz Tone Allocation”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       –     10/578r0, “Preamble Parameters”, Richard Van Nee (Qualcomm)
       –     10/382r2, “Bit Allocation”, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
       –     10/588r0, “Power Saving Feature Consideration”, Yujin Noh (LGE)
       –     10/619r0, “VHT SIG Length”, Yuichi Morioka (Sony)
       –     10/628r0, “802.11ac Preamble Design”, II-Gu Lee (ETRI)

Submission                            Slide 50             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
• Monday May 17th, PM1
    – 10/568r0 “Single User MCS Proposal”, Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
    – 10/566r1 “Sounding and P Matrix”, Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
• Tue March 18th, PM2 and PM3
    –   10/370r1, “80MHz Tone Allocation”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
    –   10/578r0, “Preamble Parameters”, Richard Van Nee (Qualcomm)
    –   10/588r0, “Power Saving Feature Consideration”, Yujin Noh
    –   10/548r0, “80MHz Transmission Flow”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
    –   10/534r0, “Duration in L-SIG”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
    –   10/619r0, “VHT SIG Length”, Yuichi Morioka (Sony)
    –   10/550r0, “VHTSIG Considerations”, Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
    –   10/382r2, “Bit Allocation”, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
          • Straw Poll was not conducted, deferred for later


 Submission                                   Slide 51                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
• Wednesday May 20th, AM1
    – 10/628r0, “802.11ac Preamble Design”, II-Gu Lee (ETRI)
    – 10/549r0, “TGac Preamble Auto Detection Comparisons”, Hongyuan Zhang
      (Marvell)
    – 10/382r2, “Bit Allocation”, Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
          • Straw polls were conducted




 Submission                              Slide 52             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll on SU MCS

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.3.F: The draft specification shall include SU MCS set
         consisting of modulation and coding levels as defined in Table on
         slide 9 except MCS 9 for 20 MHz BW.


       – Yes: 68
       – No: 9
       – Abs: 8

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                           Slide 53               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on Single LTF Section

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.1.J: All VHT transmissions shall have a preamble which
         contains a single section of long training fields, with each long
         training field multiplied by entries belonging to a single P matrix,
         to enable channel estimation at the receiver.

       – Yes: 33
       – No: 15
       – Abs: 28

       – It fails to move to task group motion


Submission                            Slide 54                       Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                       Straw Poll on NDP

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.2.C: The draft specification shall include null data packet
         (NDP) as the only preamble format for sounding PPDUs.


       – Yes: 31
       – No: 14
       – Abs: 39

       – It fails to move to task group motion


Submission                            Slide 55                      Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll on VHT-LTFs

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.1.K: The long training fields consists of one, two, four, six or
         eight VHT long training fields (VHT-LTFs) that are necessary for
         demodulation of the VHT-Data portion of the PPDU or for channel
         estimation during an NDP packet.

       – Yes: 41
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 37

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                            Slide 56                      Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll on 4x4 P Matrix

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.1.K: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for one, two or four
         VHT-LTFs shall be the same as defined in 802.11n standard
         specification (Section 20.3.9.4.6, Eq. (20-27)).


       – Yes: 67
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 9

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                          Slide 57                       Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll on 6x6 P Matrix

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for six VHT-LTFs
         shall be as defined in slide 4 of 11-10/0566r2.


       – Yes: 42
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 29

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                          Slide 58                       Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll on 8x8 P Matrix

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for eight VHT-LTFs
         shall be as defined in slide 5 of 11-10/0566r2.


       – Yes: 65
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 14

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                          Slide 59                       Vinko Erceg et al.
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on DC Tone Allocation

 •     Do you support to add to the specification frame work
       document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.x Data Formats
             •   3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 3 DC
                 tones at (0, ±1) in 80MHz VHT data field.


       – Yes: 21
       – No: 15
       – Abstain: 4

       – It fails to move to task group motion

Submission
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


 Straw Poll on DC Tone Allocation (Repeat)

 •     Do you support to add to the specification frame work
       document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.x Data Formats
             •   3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 3 DC
                 tones at (0, ±1) in 80MHz VHT data field.


       – Yes: 31
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 12

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on Null Tones at Edges

 •     Do you support to add to the specification frame work
       document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.x Data Formats
             •   3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 5 null
                 tones at the upper tone edges (tone indices 123, 124, 125, 126, 127)
                 and 6 null tones at the lower tone edges (tone indices -128, -127, -
                 126, -125, -124, -123) of the 80MHz VHT data.

       – Yes: 24
       – No: 4
       – Abstain: 14

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Straw Poll on Pilot Tones
•     Do you support to add to the specification frame work
      document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
      – 3.x Data Formats
             •   3.x.1 Pilot Subcarriers: The draft specification shall have 8 pilot
                 tones, with the positions {±103, ±75, ±39, ±11}, for 80MHz VHT
                 data.


      – Yes: 29
      – No: 6
      – Abstain: 11

      – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Straw Poll on L-STF

 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x L-STF definition: The 20 MHz L-STF pattern in the VHT
         preamble is as defined in 20.3.9.3.3 of Std 802.11n-2009.

       – Yes: 38
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion



Submission                          Slide 64
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Straw Poll on L-LTF

 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The 20 MHz L-LTF pattern in the VHT preamble is as
         defined in 20.3.9.3.4 of Std 802.11n-2009.

       – Yes: 37
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion



Submission                          Slide 65
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll on Cyclic Shift

 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The CSD (Cyclic Shift Diversity) values for up to 4 antennas
         in L-STF, L-LTF, and L-SIG are the same as the CSD values for
         the non-HT portion of the packet defined in Table 20-8 of Std
         802.11n-2009.

       – Yes: 36
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                           Slide 66
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll on Cyclic Shift

 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The CSD (Cyclic Shift Diversity) values for up to 4 antennas
         in VHT-SIG-A are the same as the CSD values for the non-HT
         portion of the packet defined in Table 20-8 of Std 802.11n-2009.

       – Yes: 38
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                           Slide 67
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     Straw Poll on L-STF

 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and subcarrier positions of L-STF
         are the same as those of the 20 MHz 11n L-STF in each 20 MHz
         subchannel.

       – Yes: 38
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                          Slide 68
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  Straw Poll on VHT-STF
                       (Postponed)
 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and subcarrier positions of VHT-
         STF are the same as those of the 20 MHz 11n L-STF in each 20
         MHz subchannel

       – Yes:
       – No:
       – Abs:

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                          Slide 69
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

         Straw Poll on Subcarriers for L-LTF,
               L-SIG, and VHT-SIG-A
 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and pilots, including subcarrier
         positions, of L-LTF, L-SIG, and VHT-SIG-A are the same as those
         for the 20 MHz 11n L-LTF and L-SIG in each 20 MHz subchannel.

       – Yes: 38
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – It passes to move to task group motion

Submission                          Slide 70
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

     Straw Poll on Subcarriers for VHT-LTF
        and VHT-DATA in 20 and 40 MHz
 • Do you support adding to the specification framework
   document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
       – 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and pilots, including subcarrier
         positions, of VHT-LTF and VHT-DATA symbols in 20 and 40
         MHz channels are the same as those for 11n HT-LTF and HT-
         DATA in 20 and 40 MHz channels.

       – Yes: 35
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 3

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission                           Slide 71
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll on Length Field

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.X: The number of OFDM symbols in a VHT packet shall be
         computed using the length field in L-SIG.


       – Yes: 15
       – No: 18
       – Abstain: 5

       – It fails to move to task group motion


Submission                           Slide 72                    Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


      Straw Poll on VHT-SIG-A Autodetect (1)
  •     Do you support to do the following insertion to the
        specification frame work document (IEEE 802.11-
        09/0992r9)
        – R3.2.1.G: The 1st symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be BPSK
          modulated. The subsequent symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be 90-
          degree rotated BPSK (QBPSK) modulated on the data subcarriers
          whose indices are 4n+1, 4n+2, 4n+3 and BPSK modulated on the
          data subcarriers whose indices are 4n (n=0,1,2,..11) for VHT
          auto-detect.
        – Yes: 33
        – No: 34
        – Abstain: 11
        – It fails to move to task group motion
Submission                         Slide 73                     Il-Gu Lee et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


      Straw Poll on VHT-SIG-A Autodetect (2)
  •     Do you support to do the following changes to the
        specification frame work document (IEEE 802.11-
        09/0992r9)
        – R3.2.1.G: The 1st symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be BPSK
          modulated. The subsequent symbol(s) second symbol of VHT-
          SIG-A shall be 90-degree rotated BPSK (QBPSK) modulated on
          its data tones for VHT auto-detect.

        – Yes: 36
        – No: 29
        – Abstain: 11

        – It fails to move to task group motion
Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


               Straw Poll on Smoothing Bit

 • Do you support excluding smoothing bit in VHT-SIG
   and stating this in the spec framework document, 11-
   09-0992?
       – Yes: 54
       – No: 5
       – Abs: 11

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll on Non-sounding Bit

 • Do you support excluding non-sounding bit in VHT-
   SIG and stating this in the spec framework document,
   11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 38
       – No: 11
       – Abs: 24

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Straw Poll on a Specific GroupID Value

 • Do you support the specific usage of a GroupID value
   of zero as described in Slide 6 of 11-10-0382r2 and
   stating this in the spec framework document, 11-09-
   0992?
       – Yes: 47
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 21

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

         Straw Poll on Bits for GroupID Field
                     (Postponed)
 • Do you support 6 bits for GroupID field (i.e., y=6 in
   slide 6) and stating this in the spec framework
   document, 11-09-0992?
       – Yes:
       – No:
       – Abs:

       – It xx to move to task group motion




Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   Straw Poll on MCS field
                              - Old Business -


 •     Do you support allowing only the same modulation
       and the same coding rate and coding type across all
       streams belonging to each user for multi user case as
       well, and stating this in the spec framework document,
       11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 51
       – No: 2
       – Abs: 5

       – It passes to move to task group motion


Submission
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   Straw Poll on STBC Bit
                              - Old Business -


 • Do you support to have one bit to indicate STBC mode
   (Alamouti scheme) and stating this in the spec
   framework document, 11-09-0992?
       – Yes: 57
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 4

       – It passes to move to task group motion




Submission
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                 Straw Poll on Autodetect

 •     Do you support bringing Autodect decision into TG?
       – Yes: 38
       – No: 26
       – Abs: 12

       – It passes to move to task group motion (50% threshold met)




Submission
November 2010                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        TGac PHY Adhoc July 12-15, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 82             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                               Submissions
       –     11-10-0772-00-00 “VHT Packet Duration Signaling”
       –     11-10-0771-00-00 “Phase Tracking During VHT-LTF”
       –     11-10-0586-01-00 “Time Domain CSI report for explicit feedback”
       –     11-10-0778-01-00 “120 MHz PHY Transmission”
       –     11-10-0779-00-00 “VHT-LTF Design for IEEE802.11ac”
       –     11-10-0791-01-00 “Phase Rotation for the 80 MHz 802.11ac Mixed
             Mode Packet”
       –     11-10-0802-00-00 “VHT-LTF sequence for 80 MHz”
       –     11-10-0548-00-00 “80MHz Transmission Flow”
       –     11-10-0811-00-00 “Pilot Sequence in VHT-Data”
       –     11-10-0827-00-00 “256QAM BW mandatory optional features”




Submission                            Slide 83              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
                            Submissions
       – 11-10-0844-00-00 “Padding using variable un-puncturing and
         repetition”
       – 11-10-0774-00-00 “160MHz Transmission”
       – 11-10-0818-00-00 “Implicit Beam forming”
       – 11-10-0750-01-00 “11ac autodetection using the VHT-SIGA Field ”
       – 11-10-0857-00-00 “256 QAM Mapping”
       – 11-10-0821-00-00 “VHT Packet Length Calculation”
       – 11-10-0820-00-00 “MCS Selection and Padding Equations”
       – 11-10-0890-00-00ac “Phase-rotations-for-vht-80-mhz.pptx”
       – 11-10-0843-00-00 “VHT-STF for 11ac”
       – 11-10-0916-00-00 “cyclic-shift-for-more-than-4-antennas-in-non-vht-
         portion.ppt”
       – 11-10-0795-00-00 “PAPR reduction of Legacy portion of VHT
         PLCP Preamble”
       – 11-10-0785-01-00 “PHY Power Saving Features For 11ac”
Submission                          Slide 84              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
    November 2010                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


            Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
•    Monday AM1
•    Tuesday AM1
•    Tuesday AM2
•    Thursday AM2




    Submission             Slide 85             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                Straw Poll #1

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.2.X: The number of OFDM symbols in a VHT packet shall be
         computed using the length field in L-SIG.



             Yes: 41
             No: 15
             Abs: 26
             Straw Poll Fails




Submission                           Slide 86                   Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                              doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                Straw Poll #2

 • Do you support adding the following row into Table 1
   in the specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
        Field               Bits   Description
        Short GI            2      – b00        : Long GI packet
                                      • # symbols = ceil(L-SIG length / 3)
                                   – b01        : Reserved
                                   – b10        : Short GI packet
                                      • # symbols = floor(ceil(L-SIG length / 3) * 4 / 3.6 )
                                   – b11        : Short GI packet
                                      • # symbols = floor(ceil(L-SIG length / 3) * 4 / 3.6 ) – 1



             Yes: 42
             No: 17
             Abs: 22
             Straw Poll Fails
Submission                              Slide 87                                     Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                               doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
                                 Straw Poll #3


 • Do you support adding the following items into of the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
   (Note: Refer to solution provided on slides 6 and 7)
       – 3.2.3.2.4 VHT-LTF definition
          • The VHT-LTF symbols shall have the same number of pilot subcarriers as the
             data symbols. The pilot subcarrier indices of the VHT-LTF symbols shall be
             identical to the pilot subcarrier indices of the data symbols. The pilot
             subcarriers shall use the element of the VHT-LTF sequence corresponding to
             that subcarrier index.
          • The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P shall be applied to all subcarriers in the
             VHT-LTF symbols except for the pilot subcarriers. Instead, a row-repetition
             matrix R shall be applied to all pilot subcarriers in the VHT-LTF symbols. The
             row-repetition matrix R has the same dimensions as the matrix P (NSTS x NLTF),
             with all rows of the matrix R being identical to the first row of the matrix P of
             the corresponding dimension. This results in all space-time streams of the pilot
           Yes: 57
             subcarriers in VHT-LTF symbols to have the same pilot values.
          •No: 9each pilot subcarrier, the same per-stream CSD and spatial mapping shall
             For
             be 14
           Abs:applied across VHT-LTF and data symbols
             Straw Poll Passes
Submission                                   Slide 88                             Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                               Straw Poll #4
 • Do you support modifying the VHT-LTF mapping
   matrix P for six VHT-LTFs in section 3.2.3.2.4 of the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992, as
                    1  1  1  1   1   1 
   follows?                             5 
                          1  2  3
                               1   w
                                    4
                                           w      w       w      w 
                               1    w2   w4     w6      w8      w10 
                       P6 x6                                          
                               1    w3   w6     w9      w12     w15 
                               1    w4   w8     w12     w16     w 20 
                                                                    25 
                               1
                                    w5   w10    w15     w 20   w    

                       where w  exp(  j 2 / 6)

             Yes: 52
             No: 12                                   Straw Poll Passes
             Abs: 12
Submission                                 Slide 89                          Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                            Strawpoll #5

 • Do you support adding the following section and item
   into the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992?
       – Section 3.1.2 120 MHz PHY Transmission
             • R3.1.2.A: The draft specification shall include
               support for 120 MHz PHY transmission.

       – Yes: 32
       – No: 30
       – Abstain: 30
       Straw Poll Fails

Submission                         Slide 90
November 2010                       doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                    StrawPoll #6

 • Do you support to adopt some advanced training
   sequences (e.g., CAZAC codes) as VHT-LTFs and to
   edit the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
   accordingly?

       – Yes: 6
       – No: 24
       – Abs: 49
 Straw Poll Fails



Submission               Slide 91
November 2010                                                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                                              Strawpoll 7
 •    Do you accept the VHT-LTF sequence specified on slide 6 of this
      document (without phase rotations) as the base VHT-LTF sequence for 80
      MHz and agree to add the following text to the spec framework
      document?
      ―In a 80 MHz transmission, the VHT-LTF sequence to be transmitted (on
      subcarriers -122 to 122) shall be:
             VHTLTF122,122   1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1
                             -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1
                             -1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1
                              1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1
                              0 0 0 1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1
                             1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1
                             -1 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1
                             1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1    ”
       – Y 37
       – N8                          Straw Poll Passes
       – A 11
Submission                                                  Slide 92                                   Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                Strawpoll 8
 •    Do you accept the (per 20 MHz) phase rotations specified on slide 6 of this
      document for VHT-LTFs in 80 MHz transmissions and agree to add the
      following text to the spec framework document ?
       In the VHT-LTF sequence of an 80 MHz VHT PPDU, subcarrier k, where
     122  k  122 , shall be multiplied by the following function of k, prior to
      transmission:
                                1 , k  64
                           k  
                                1 , k  64.


       – Y 32
       – N 11
       – A 18
       Straw Poll Fails


Submission                              Slide 93                 Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                                       doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                               Strawpoll 9

 • Do you agree to extend the phase rotation on VHT 80 MHz LTFs
   to the 80 MHz legacy preamble, VHT preamble and data portion
   and add the following text to the spec frame work document?
      ―In all elements of an 80 MHz VHT PPDU , i.e., the L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG,
      VHT-SIG-A, VHT-LTFs, VHT-SIG-B and the Data, the same function of k
      shall be used to multiply subcarrier k, prior to transmission‖


       – Y 34
       – N 12
       – A 16
       Straw Poll Fails


Submission                             Slide 94                 Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                          Straw Poll #10

 • Do you support to have 90 degrees phase rotation for
   the 2nd 20MHz subchannel and -90 degrees phase
   rotation for the 4th 20MHz subchannel, of L-STF, L-
   LTF, L-SIG and VHT-SIG-A in VHT mixed format
   packet as described in slide 8 and edit the specification
   framework accordingly?
       – A Yes: 9
       – B No: 24
       – C Abs: 20
       Straw Poll Fails


Submission                     Slide 95
November 2010                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                          Straw Poll #11

 • Do you support to have 90 degrees phase rotation for
   the 2nd 20MHz subchannel and -90 degrees phase
   rotation for the 4th 20MHz subchannel, of VHT-STF,
   VHT-LTF, VHT-SIG-B, and DATA field in VHT mixed
   format packet as described in slide 8 and edit the
   specification framework accordingly?
       – A Yes: 8
       – B No: 24
       – C Abs: 20
       Straw Poll Fails


Submission                     Slide 96
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        Straw Poll 12 (20/40MHz Interleaver)

 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC encoding, the interleaver parameters for 20/40MHz
         802.11ac packets will remain unchanged from 20/40MHz 802.11n,
         i.e., the NCOL and NROT parameters for 20/40MHz are as in the
         table below:




       – Yes: 54
       – No: 0
       – Abstain:5
Submission                            Slide 97                    Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Straw Poll 13 (80MHz Interleaver NCOL)

 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC encoding, the NCOL value for 80 MHz 11ac is given by
         NCOL = 26




       – Yes: 54
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 9



Submission                            Slide 98                    Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Straw Poll 14 (80MHz Interleaver NROT)

 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC encoding, the NROT value for 80 MHz 11ac is given by
         NROT = 58 for 4 or fewer streams
       – The cyclic shifts applied on the different streams are given by [0 2 1 3]*
         NROT, identical to 11n


       – Yes: 59
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 7




Submission                               Slide 99                       Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll 15 (Encoder Parsing)

 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC encoding, the encoder parsing done in the same way as in
         11n, i.e.,
       – The encoder parser cycles through all the encoders in a round robin
         fashion assigning one bit to each encoder in each cycle.
       – Each encoder is therefore assigned an equal number of bits.


       – Yes: 65
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 3


Submission                           Slide 100                    Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


               Straw Poll 16 (Stream Parsing)

 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC encoding, stream parsing done in the same way as 11n, i.e.,
       – Consecutive blocks of s(iss) bits are assigned to different spatial streams
          in a round robin fashion.
       – If multiple encoders are present per user, the output of each encoder is
          used in a round robin cycle, i.e.,
             • At the beginning S bits from the output of first
               encoder are fed into all spatial streams,
             • Then S bits from the output of the next encoder are
               used and so on. S is a sum of s(iss) over all streams)
       – Yes: 60
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 3
Submission                               Slide 101                       Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


               Straw Poll 17 (Pilot in Data)

 • Do you support adding the following paragraph in the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – Pilot Subcarriers
          • [Copy the text of slides 11-10-0811-01-00ac 4 – 8]
       – Yes: 54
       – No: 7
       – Abstain: 5




Submission
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll #18 (256-QAM)

 • Would you support 256 QAM as a mandatory device
   feature in TGac and indicate in the Specification
   Framework document?

       – Yes: 0
       – No: 57
       – Abs: 7




Submission                Slide 103                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll #19 (256-QAM)

 • Would you support 256 QAM as an optional device
   feature in TGac and indicate in the Specification
   Framework document?

       – Yes: 73
       – No:2
       – Abs:2




Submission                Slide 104                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #20 (BW)

 • Would you support 40 MHz BW as a mandatory
   transmit and receive device capability in TGac and
   indicate in the Specification Framework document?

       – Yes: 61
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 15




Submission                 Slide 105                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #21 (BW)

 • Would you support 80 MHz BW as a mandatory
   transmit and receive device capability in TGac and
   indicate in the Specification Framework document?

       – Yes: 59
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 8




Submission                 Slide 106                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                  Straw Poll #22 (BW)

 • Would you support contiguous 160 MHz BW as a
   mandatory transmit and receive device capability in
   TGac and indicate in the Specification Framework
   document?

       – Yes: 0
       – No: 72
       – Abs: 2




Submission                 Slide 107                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #25 (BW)

 • Would you support contiguous 160 MHz BW as an
   optional transmit and receive device capability in TGac
   and indicate in the Specification Framework
   document?

       – Yes: 67
       – No:0
       – Abs:1




Submission                 Slide 108                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                  Straw Poll #26 (BW)

 • Would you support non-contiguous 160 MHz BW as a
   mandatory transmit and receive device capability in
   TGac and indicate in the Specification Framework
   document?

       – Yes: 0
       – No: 71
       – Abs: 2




Submission                Slide 109                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #27 (BW)

 • Would you support non-contiguous 160 MHz BW as an
   optional transmit and receive device capability in TGac
   and indicate in the Specification Framework
   document?

       – Yes: 67
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 7




Submission                 Slide 110                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #27 (Efficient Padding)

 • Do you support adding to the specification frame work
   variable un-puncture and repetition for Multi-user
   packets?

       – Yes: 18
       – No:24
       – Abs:33

       – It ____ to move to task group motion




Submission                         Slide 111                Kiran, et al., Ralink Tech.
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #28 (160MHz)

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.X: Carrier (LO) and symbol clock frequencies for all transmit
         chains and frequency segments shall be derived from the same
         reference oscillator.

       – Yes: 63
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0




Submission                          Slide 112                    Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                   Straw Poll #29 (160 MHz)

 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – R3.X: Phase of carrier frequency shall not be required to be
         correlated between the lower and upper 80 MHz frequency
         portions of the transmitted signal for 160 MHz PPDUs.

       – Yes: 63
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 5




Submission                          Slide 113                     Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
                   Straw Poll #30 (160 MHz)


 • Do you support adding the following items into the specification
   framework document, 11-09/0992?
   (Refer to slides 6-9)
       – 3.2.3 VHT preamble
             • The L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG, VHT-STF and VHT-LTF portions of
               preamble for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall be constructed by
               repeating the 80 MHz counterparts twice in frequency, once in the
               lower 80 MHz subchannel and one more time in the upper 80 MHz
               subchannel of the 160 MHz bandwidth.
       – 3.2.3.1.2 L-STF definition
             • The L-STF pattern for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall repeat
               the 80 MHz L-STF pattern twice in frequency. This corresponds
               to repeating the 11n 20 MHz L-STF pattern in Equation (20-8) in
               each of the 20 MHz subchannel, then applying the following phase
               rotation per 20 MHz subchannel starting from the lowest 20 MHz
               subchannel in frequency: [1, -1, -1, -1, 1, -1, -1, -1].

Submission                             Slide 114                      Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
             Straw Poll #30 (160 MHz) (Cont’d)
       – 3.2.3.1.3 L-LTF definition
          • The L-LTF pattern for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall
            repeat the 80 MHz L-LTF pattern twice in frequency. This
            corresponds to repeating the 11n 20 MHz L-LTF pattern in
            Equation (20-11) in each of the 20 MHz subchannel, then
            applying the following phase rotation per 20 MHz subchannel
            starting from the lowest 20 MHz subchannel in frequency: [1, -
            1, -1, -1, 1, -1, -1, -1].
       – 3.2.3.1.4 L-SIG definition
          • L-SIG for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall be constructed by
            repeating the L-SIG for 80 MHz VHT transmissions twice in
            frequency, once in the lower 80 MHz subchannel and one more
            time in the upper 80 MHz subchannel of the 160 MHz
            bandwidth. The following phase rotation per 20 MHz
            subchannel shall be applied starting from the lowest 20 MHz
            subchannel in frequency: [1, -1, -1, -1, 1, -1, -1, -1].

Submission                          Slide 115                    Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
             Straw Poll #30 (160 MHz) (Cont’d)


       –     3.2.3.2.3 VHT-STF definition
              • VHT-STF sequence for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall be constructed by
                repeating the VHT-STF sequence for 80 MHz VHT transmissions twice in
                frequency as follows
                where VHTSTF-122,122 is the VHT-STF sequence for 80 MHz VHT
                transmissions. The following phase rotation per 20 MHz subchannel shall be
                applied starting from the lowest 20 MHz subchannel in frequency: [1, -1, -1, -1,
                1, -1, -1, -1].
                 VHTSTF    250, 250   
                                  VHTSTF         , 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,VHTSTF
                                            122,122                                         
                                                                                      122,122

       –     3.2.3.2.4 VHT-LTF definition
              • VHT-LTF sequence for 160 MHz VHT transmissions shall be constructed by
                repeating the VHT-LTF sequence for 80 MHz VHT transmissions twice in
                frequency as follows


                                       
                VHTLTF250, 250  is the VHT-LTF sequence 0, 80 0, 0 0, 0, transmissions.
              where VHTLTF-122,122 VHTLTF122,122, 0, 0, 0, 0, for0, 0,MHz, VHTVHTLTF122,122
                The following phase rotation per 20 MHz subchannel shall be applied starting
                                                                                                  
                from the lowest 20 MHz subchannel in frequency: [1, -1, -1, -1, 1, -1, -1, -1].
       – Yes: 56              No: 0               Abs: 1



Submission                                     Slide 116                            Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                 Straw Poll #31 (160 MHz)
 • Do you support adding the following item into the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – 3.2.4.3 OFDM modulation
          • For 160 MHz VHT transmissions, the same phase rotation per
            20 MHz subchannel used for preamble portion of the VHT
            packet shall also be applied to the data symbols. Specifically,
            the following phase rotation per 20 MHz subchannel shall be
            applied to the data symbols, starting from the lowest 20 MHz
            subchannel in frequency: [1, -1, -1, -1, 1, -1, -1, -1].
       – Yes: 51
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 10



Submission                           Slide 117                     Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
                       Straw Poll #32 (160 MHz)


 •    Do you support adding the following item into the specification
      framework document, 11-09/0992?
       – 3.2.4.2 Pilot subcarriers
              • The draft specification shall have 16 pilot subcarriers, with the
                  subcarrier indices {±25, ±53, ±89, ±117, ±139, ±167, ±203}, for
                  160 MHz VHT transmissions. The pilot sequence and mapping for
                  160 MHz VHT transmissions shall be obtained by repeating the 80
                          pilot , 89
                  MHz139, 117sequence and mapping twice in frequency. Specifically, the
     Pn231, 203pilotsequence53, 25, 25,53,89,117,139,167, 203, 231 be as follows, where n is the
                  , 167,
                                      for the nth symbol shall
                  80 MHz pilot pattern:
      n mod8 , n1 mod8 , n2  mod8 , n3 mod8 , n4  mod8 , n5  mod8 , n6  mod8 , n7  mod8 ,
         n mod8 , n1 mod8 , n2  mod8 , n3 mod8 , n4  mod8 , n5  mod8 , n6  mod8 , n7  mod8 ,

             Including the pseudo random scrambling sequence, the pilot value for the
               kth tone, with k = {±25, ±53, ±89, ±117, ±139, ±167, ±203}, is
               pn+zPnk, where z = 4 for VHT, and pn is defined in Section 17.3.5.9 of
               IEEE802.11. Note that this does not include the phase rotation per 20
               MHz subchannel yet.
       – Yes: 58                         No: 0         Abs: 3


Submission                                           Slide 118                                     Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0
             Straw Poll #32 (Implicit TxBF)



 • Do you agree with any of the merits described in
   802.11ac 818r1?
       – Yes: 31
       – No: 1
       – Abs: 20




Submission                 Slide 119                   Youhan Kim, et al.
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Straw Poll #33 (256-QAM constellation)

 • Do you accept the 256 QAM constellation mapping as
   shown on Slide 3 of this document to be included into
   the Specification Framework document 11-09/0992 ?
       – Yes: 73
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 1




Submission                 Slide 120             Joseph Lauer et.al, Broadcom
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


     Straw Poll #34 (MCS Exclusions for BCC)
 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.3.x (Modulation and Coding Scheme)):
       – For BCC encoding, some of the MCS-NSS combinations are
         excluded from the MCS table to avoid additional padding symbols
       – Allowed MCSs are selected such that the number of coded bits in
         each OFDM symbol contains an integer number of punctured
                                                                              1
         blocks from all encoders, i.e., mathematically every          2, R  2
                                                                       
          allowed MCS-NSS satisfies:                                   3, R  2
                                            N              N                                      3
                                         mod  CBPS , DR   0   R    R
                                                                         , where DR  
                                              N ES                  DR              4, R         3
                                                                                                    4
                                                                                                    5
                                                                                      6, R 
                                                                                                    6

       – Yes: 34
       – No: 2
       – Abstain: 6
Submission                           Slide 121                             Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Straw Poll 35 (Exclusions for LDPC)
 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.3.x (Modulation and Coding Scheme)):
       – For the data rates that allows both BCC and LDPC, 802.11ac have
         a common MCS table for both BCC and LDPC, i.e.,
       – The MCS-NSS combinations excluded for BCC also be excluded
         for LDPC

       – Yes: 43
       – No: 1
       – Abstain: 8




Submission                           Slide 122                   Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                Straw Poll 36 (SU Padding)
 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC, the padding equation and padding flow should be as
         shown in slide 6[10/0820r0], for SU packets (identical to 11n)




       – Yes: 46
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 1




Submission                           Slide 123                    Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


               Straw Poll 37 (MU Padding)
 •    Do you support adding the following to the specification framework
      document (11-09/0992, Section 3.2.4.x (VHT Data Field)):
       – For BCC, the padding equation and padding flow should be as
         shown in slide 7[10/0820r0], for MU packets.

       – Yes: 43
       – No: 0
       – Abstain: 5




Submission                           Slide 124                    Sudhir Srinivasa et al.
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                Strawpoll 38
 •    Do you accept the (per 20 MHz) phase rotations specified on slide 6 of
      10/0802r0 for all VHT sections of the PPDU in 80 MHz transmissions and
      agree to add the following text to the spec framework document ?
      “ In the VHT section of an 80 MHz VHT-mixed format PPDU, subcarrier k,
      where 122  k  122 , shall be multiplied by the following function of k, prior
      to transmission:
                                 1 , k  64
                            k  
                                 1 , k  64. ”


       – Y 41
       – N 10
       – A 9




Submission                               Slide 125                  Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                             Straw Poll #39
 • Do you support using the VHT-STF sequence
       – For 20 MHz and 40 MHz As defined in 11n?
       – For 80 MHz, copies of the 20 MHz VHT-STF sequence for each 20 MHz subband
         with proper phase rotation?
       – For 160 MHz, copies of the 80 MHz VHT-STF sequence for each 80 MHz
         subband?

     and agree to add the following text (as shown on slide 7 [10/0834r0]
     ) to the specification framework document?


       – Yes: 53
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0


Submission                              Slide 126                               ACcord
November 2010                                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                                         Straw Poll #40
 • Do you support using the following CSD table for the VHT portion
   (starting from VHT-STF) of the SU-MIMO frame and agree to
   edit the specification framework accordingly?
                      0     0       0       0       0       0       0  0 
                      0     400     0       0       0     0     0     0 
                                                                          
                      0     400    200     0       0     0     0     0 
                                                                          
                        0    400    200    600     0     0     0     0 
             TCSD                                                            (in units of ns).
                      0     400    200    600    350   0     0     0 
                                                                          
                      0     400    200    600    350  650   0     0 
                      0     400    200    600    350  650  100   0 
                                                                          
                      0
                            400    200    600    350  650  100  750
                                                                           


       – Yes: 53
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

Submission                                               Slide 127                                 ACcord
November 2010                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                      Straw Poll #41
             on CSD for More Than 4 Antennas
 • For more than 4 antennas, do you support
   1. To constrain the CSD values in L-STF, L-LTF, and
   L-SIG and VHT-SIGA to be within an interval of 200ns
   2. CSD values are different for different antennas
   3. VHT-SIGA has the same CSD values as L-STF, L-
   LTF, and L-SIG

       – Yes: 58
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

Submission
November 2010                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


      TGac PHY Adhoc September 13-14, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 129             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                          Submissions
       – 10/1052, “VHT-SIG-A and VHT-SIG-B Field Structure”, Richard
         van Nee (Qualcomm)
       – 10/1083, “Phase Rotations for 80 MHz”, Sameer Vermani
         (Qualcomm)
       – 10/1086, “Cyclic Shifts Values for Legacy Portion”, Leonardo
         Lanante Jr. (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
       – 10/1109, “Spectral mask flatness”, Ron Porat (Broadcom)
       – 10/1062, “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization”, Zhendong
         Luo (CATR)
       – 10/1076, “60MHz and 120 MHz Transmission Options”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1063, “160 MHz Transmission Flow”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – 10/1118, “Interleavers for 160MHz Transmission”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1089, “Max-per-BCC-data-rate.ppt”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – 10/1090, “256QAM-scaling”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
Submission                       Slide 130             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                         Submissions (2)
       – 10/1105, “Explicit Sounding and Feedback”, Hongyuan Zhang
         (Marvell) : for joint session with MU-MIMO adhoc
       – 10/0844, “Padding using variable un-puncturing and repetition”,
         Kiran Uln (Ralink) : withdrawn
       – 10/0821, “VHT packet length calculation”, Peter Loc (Ralink) :
         withdrawn




Submission                          Slide 131              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
• Monday PM3 (19:30-21:30)
    – 10/1052, “VHT-SIG-A and VHT-SIG-B Field Structure”, Richard van
      Nee (Qualcomm)
    – 10/1083, “Phase Rotations for 80 MHz”, Sameer Vermani (Qualcomm)
    – 10/1086, “Cyclic Shifts Values for Legacy Portion”, Leonardo Lanante Jr.
      (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
    – 10/1076, “60MHz and 120 MHz Transmission Options”, Jianhan Liu
      (Mediatek)
    – 10/1109, “Spectral mask flatness”, Ron Porat (Broadcom)
    – 10/1089, “Max-per-BCC-data-rate.ppt”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)




 Submission                         Slide 132              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week (2)

 • Tuesday AM1-I (08:00-09:00)
       – PHY/MU-MIMO joint session on NDP/Feedback
       – 10/1105, “Explicit Sounding and Feedback”, Hongyuan Zhang
         (Marvell)


 • Tuesday AM1-II (09:00-10:00)
       – 10/1062, “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization”, Zhendong
         Luo (CATR)




Submission                        Slide 133             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week (3)

 • Tuesday AM2 (10:30-12:30)
       – 10/1063, “160 MHz Transmission Flow”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – 10/1118, “Interleavers for 160MHz Transmission”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1090, “256QAM-scaling”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – 10/0844, “Padding using variable un-puncturing and repetition”,
         Kiran Uln (Ralink) : withdrawn
       – 10/0821, “VHT packet length calculation”, Peter Loc (Ralink) :
         withdrawn




Submission                         Slide 134              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


   Strawpoll #1 (VHT SIG-A and VHT SIG-B)

 • Do you support adding the VHT-SIG-A/B and VHT-
   SIG-B CRC structure from slides 3-8 to the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?

       – Yes: 49
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Strawpoll #2 (Phase Rotations)
 • Do you agree to re-use the phase rotations adopted for the VHT
   section of the 80 MHz PPDU for the 80 MHz legacy preamble,
   and VHT-SIG-A by adding the following text to the spec
   framework document ?
      ―In all elements of an 80 MHz VHT PPDU , i.e., the L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG,
      VHT-SIG-A, VHT-LTFs, VHT-SIG-B and the Data, the following function of k
      shall be used to multiply subcarrier k, prior to transmission‖

                                  1 , k  64
                             k  
       – Yes: 50                  1 , k  64.
       – No: 0
       – Abs 0

       – Strawpoll passes
Submission                            Slide 136                Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Strawpoll #3 (CSD Values 1)

 • Do you support using the CSD values of [0 -50ns -100ns
   -150ns -200ns], natural extension from 11n CSD, for
   five transmit antennas in the non-VHT portion of 11ac
   mixed mode packet and updating the specification
   framework accordingly (doc. 802.11-10/1086r2)?

       – Yes: 16
       – No: 7
       – Abstain: 24

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Strawpoll #4 (CSD Values 2)

 • Do you support using the CSD values, simple linear
   incremental values including -200ns, in slide 13 for 6, 7,
   and 8 antennas in the non-VHT portion of 11ac mixed
   mode packet and updating the specification framework
   accordingly (doc. 802.11-10/1086r2)?

       – Yes: 8
       – No: 8
       – Abstain: 29

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #5 (Spectral Mask)

 • Do you support spectral mask requirements as outlined
   in slide 4 (doc. 802.11-10/1109r0)?

       – Yes: 33
       – No: 3
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
                            Slide 139                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #6 (Spectral Flatness)

 • Do you support spectral flatness requirements as
   outlined in slide 6 (doc. 802.11-10/1109r0)?

       – Yes: 36
       – No: 2
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
                            Slide 140                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #7 (Max BCC Rate)

 • Do you support updating the IEEE Specification Framework for
   TGac to require that (doc. 802.11-10/1089r1) :
       – The maximum data rate per BCC encoder be 600Mbps
       – The number of BCC encoders for a particular combination of MCS, Nsts and
         BW be determined by the short GI data rate and that the same number of
         encoders be used for the corresponding normal GI rate
       – The number of BCC encoders not be limited?

       – Yes: 52
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – Strawpoll passes
Submission                            Slide 141                    Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #8 (BF Feedback 1)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that only explicit sounding and feedback be supported for
   VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 49
       – No: 16
       – Abs: 4

       – Strawpoll passes


Submission                  Slide 142                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #9 (BF Feedback 2)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that NDP be the only VHT sounding format (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 53
       – No: 11
       – Abs: 5

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 143                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Straw Poll #10 (BF Feedback 3)
  •    Do you support updating the spec framework to define the VHT NDP
       format as follows (doc. 802.11-10/1105r0):
         – Same format as the VHT PPDU but with no data portion
         – VHT-SIG-A indicates SU packet
         – VHT-SIG-B carries a fixed TBD bit pattern
      and adding the following figure?

         – Yes: 57
         – No: 0
         – Abs: 10

         – Strawpoll passes

      L-STF    L-LTF   L-SIG
                               VHT-SIG-A
                               (Symbol 1)
                                            VHT-SIG-A
                                            (Symbol 2)
                                                         VHT-STF VHT-LTF1   …   VHT-LTFN   VHT-SIG-B




Submission                                      Slide 144                            Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #11 (BF Feedback 4)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that the explicit sounding feedback be sent SIFS after the
   NDP or Polling frame with no option for the delayed or
   aggregated feedback as defined in 11n (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 52
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 9

       – Strawpoll passes

Submission                  Slide 145                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #12 (BF Feedback 5a)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that compressed V matrix feedback, as defined in
   subclause 20.3.12.2.5, be the only feedback format for
   both VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc.
   802.11-10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 40
       – No: 25
       – Abs: 2

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission                 Slide 146                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #13 (BF Feedback 5b)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that compressed V matrix feedback, as defined in
   subclause 20.3.12.2.5, be one feedback format for both
   VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 58
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 9

       – Strawpoll passes

Submission                  Slide 147                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #14 (BF Feedback 6)
 •    Do you support updating the spec framework to define the VHT
      compressed V feedback frame as an Action No ACK format with
       – Category = VHT
       – Action = Compressed Beamforming
       – Containing a VHT MIMO Control field with 1-byte Sounding sequence number,
         and other TBD subfields
       – Containing a Compressed Beamforming Report field
     and adding the following figure?

       – Yes: 56
                                          Order     Information
       – No: 3                            1         Category (VHT)
       – Abstain: 8                       2         Action (Compressed Beamforming)
                                          3         VHT MIMO Control (TBD)
                                          4         Compressed Beamforming Report
       – Strawpoll passes                           (TBD)

Submission                              Slide 148                           Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #15 (BF Feedback 7)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to define
   Compressed Beamforming Report Field as shown in the
   next slide?

       – Yes: 60
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 149                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                SP #15—Proposed Spec Framework Text

• Insert a new section 6.x describing the Compressed
  Beamforming Report Field, by adopting the 11n
  subclause 7.3.1.29, and:

             • With extending Table 7-25i to the angle ordering to up to 8
               streams (refer to Appendix II)

             • With TBD extensions to 80MHz and 160MHz

             • With TBD extensions or modifications of 7-25f, on tone-
               grouping, and tone mapping.

             • With TBD extensions or modifications of Table 7-25j, on the
               number of bits used to quantize the angles.
Submission
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #16 (120 MHz Strawpoll)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992?
        • R3.1.E: The draft specification shall include support for an
          efficient channelization in China’s spectrum (5,725 ~ 5,850 MHz),
          where the total available channel bandwidth is up to 120 MHz.

       – Yes: 15
       – No: 15
       – Abs: 25

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission                        Slide 151                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #17 (160 MHz Tx Flow)

 • Do you support 160 MHz transmission flow as shown on
   slide 4 and to edit the specification framework document
   (11-09/0992) as shown on slide 11 of 10/1063r1?

       – Yes: 41
       – No: 5
       – Abs: 7

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 152                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Straw Poll #18 (Interleaver for 160 MHz)

 • Do you agree to further investigate interleaver and/or bit
   parser for 160MHz transmission?

       – Yes: 32
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 17

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 153                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #19 (256QAM Scaling)

 • Do you support to add the following language to Clause
   3.2.4.3 of the IEEE Specification Framework for TGac:
   ―The normalization factor, KMOD, for 256 QAM is 1 170 .‖ ?

       – Yes: 51
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 1

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 154                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        Straw Poll #20 (120 MHz Strawpoll 1)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992r13?
        • R3.1.E: The draft specification shall include support for an
          efficient channelization in China’s (5,725 ~ 5,850 MHz) spectrum.

       – Yes: 35
       – No: 1
       – Abs: 11

       – Strawpoll passes



Submission                        Slide 155                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        Straw Poll #21 (120 MHz Strawpoll 2)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992?
        • The total bandwidth of the channels defined for China shall be
          equal to or not less than 120 MHz.

       – Yes: 12
       – No: 23
       – Abs: 23

       – Strawpoll fails



Submission                        Slide 156                  Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


      TGac PHY Adhoc September 13-14, 2010

 •    Review Ad Hoc operating rules
 •    Review previous activities
 •    Review Ad Hoc scope
 •    Call for contributions
 •    Submissions
 •    Next meeting




Submission                    Slide 157             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                          Submissions
       – 10/1052, “VHT-SIG-A and VHT-SIG-B Field Structure”, Richard
         van Nee (Qualcomm)
       – 10/1083, “Phase Rotations for 80 MHz”, Sameer Vermani
         (Qualcomm)
       – 10/1086, “Cyclic Shifts Values for Legacy Portion”, Leonardo
         Lanante Jr. (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
       – 10/1109, “Spectral mask flatness”, Ron Porat (Broadcom)
       – 10/1062, “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization”, Zhendong
         Luo (CATR)
       – 10/1076, “60MHz and 120 MHz Transmission Options”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1063, “160 MHz Transmission Flow”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – 10/1118, “Interleavers for 160MHz Transmission”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1089, “Max-per-BCC-data-rate.ppt”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – 10/1090, “256QAM-scaling”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
Submission                       Slide 158             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                         Submissions (2)
       – 10/1105, “Explicit Sounding and Feedback”, Hongyuan Zhang
         (Marvell) : for joint session with MU-MIMO adhoc
       – 10/0844, “Padding using variable un-puncturing and repetition”,
         Kiran Uln (Ralink) : withdrawn
       – 10/0821, “VHT packet length calculation”, Peter Loc (Ralink) :
         withdrawn




Submission                          Slide 159              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
 November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


         Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week
• Monday PM3 (19:30-21:30)
    – 10/1052, “VHT-SIG-A and VHT-SIG-B Field Structure”, Richard van
      Nee (Qualcomm)
    – 10/1083, “Phase Rotations for 80 MHz”, Sameer Vermani (Qualcomm)
    – 10/1086, “Cyclic Shifts Values for Legacy Portion”, Leonardo Lanante Jr.
      (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
    – 10/1076, “60MHz and 120 MHz Transmission Options”, Jianhan Liu
      (Mediatek)
    – 10/1109, “Spectral mask flatness”, Ron Porat (Broadcom)
    – 10/1089, “Max-per-BCC-data-rate.ppt”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)




 Submission                         Slide 160              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week (2)

 • Tuesday AM1-I (08:00-09:00)
       – PHY/MU-MIMO joint session on NDP/Feedback
       – 10/1105, “Explicit Sounding and Feedback”, Hongyuan Zhang
         (Marvell)


 • Tuesday AM1-II (09:00-10:00)
       – 10/1062, “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization”, Zhendong
         Luo (CATR)




Submission                        Slide 161             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Tentative TGac Agenda for the Week (3)

 • Tuesday AM2 (10:30-12:30)
       – 10/1063, “160 MHz Transmission Flow”, Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – 10/1118, “Interleavers for 160MHz Transmission”, Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 10/1090, “256QAM-scaling”, Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – 10/0844, “Padding using variable un-puncturing and repetition”,
         Kiran Uln (Ralink) : withdrawn
       – 10/0821, “VHT packet length calculation”, Peter Loc (Ralink) :
         withdrawn




Submission                         Slide 162              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


   Strawpoll #1 (VHT SIG-A and VHT SIG-B)

 • Do you support adding the VHT-SIG-A/B and VHT-
   SIG-B CRC structure from slides 3-8 to the
   specification framework document, 11-09/0992?

       – Yes: 49
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Strawpoll #2 (Phase Rotations)
 • Do you agree to re-use the phase rotations adopted for the VHT
   section of the 80 MHz PPDU for the 80 MHz legacy preamble,
   and VHT-SIG-A by adding the following text to the spec
   framework document ?
      ―In all elements of an 80 MHz VHT PPDU , i.e., the L-STF, L-LTF, L-SIG,
      VHT-SIG-A, VHT-LTFs, VHT-SIG-B and the Data, the following function of k
      shall be used to multiply subcarrier k, prior to transmission‖

                                  1 , k  64
                             k  
       – Yes: 50                  1 , k  64.
       – No: 0
       – Abs 0

       – Strawpoll passes
Submission                            Slide 164                Sameer Vermani, Qualcomm
November 2010                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Strawpoll #3 (CSD Values 1)

 • Do you support using the CSD values of [0 -50ns -100ns
   -150ns -200ns], natural extension from 11n CSD, for
   five transmit antennas in the non-VHT portion of 11ac
   mixed mode packet and updating the specification
   framework accordingly (doc. 802.11-10/1086r2)?

       – Yes: 16
       – No: 7
       – Abstain: 24

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Strawpoll #4 (CSD Values 2)

 • Do you support using the CSD values, simple linear
   incremental values including -200ns, in slide 13 for 6, 7,
   and 8 antennas in the non-VHT portion of 11ac mixed
   mode packet and updating the specification framework
   accordingly (doc. 802.11-10/1086r2)?

       – Yes: 8
       – No: 8
       – Abstain: 29

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #5 (Spectral Mask)

 • Do you support spectral mask requirements as outlined
   in slide 4 (doc. 802.11-10/1109r0)?

       – Yes: 33
       – No: 3
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
                            Slide 167                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #6 (Spectral Flatness)

 • Do you support spectral flatness requirements as
   outlined in slide 6 (doc. 802.11-10/1109r0)?

       – Yes: 36
       – No: 2
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission
                            Slide 168                Vinko Erceg, Broadcom
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #7 (Max BCC Rate)

 • Do you support updating the IEEE Specification Framework for
   TGac to require that (doc. 802.11-10/1089r1) :
       – The maximum data rate per BCC encoder be 600Mbps
       – The number of BCC encoders for a particular combination of MCS, Nsts and
         BW be determined by the short GI data rate and that the same number of
         encoders be used for the corresponding normal GI rate
       – The number of BCC encoders not be limited?

       – Yes: 52
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 0

       – Strawpoll passes
Submission                            Slide 169                    Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #8 (BF Feedback 1)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that only explicit sounding and feedback be supported for
   VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 49
       – No: 16
       – Abs: 4

       – Strawpoll passes


Submission                  Slide 170                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #9 (BF Feedback 2)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that NDP be the only VHT sounding format (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 53
       – No: 11
       – Abs: 5

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 171                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


              Straw Poll #10 (BF Feedback 3)
  •    Do you support updating the spec framework to define the VHT NDP
       format as follows (doc. 802.11-10/1105r0):
         – Same format as the VHT PPDU but with no data portion
         – VHT-SIG-A indicates SU packet
         – VHT-SIG-B carries a fixed TBD bit pattern
      and adding the following figure?

         – Yes: 57
         – No: 0
         – Abs: 10

         – Strawpoll passes

      L-STF    L-LTF   L-SIG
                               VHT-SIG-A
                               (Symbol 1)
                                            VHT-SIG-A
                                            (Symbol 2)
                                                         VHT-STF VHT-LTF1   …   VHT-LTFN   VHT-SIG-B




Submission                                      Slide 172                            Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #11 (BF Feedback 4)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that the explicit sounding feedback be sent SIFS after the
   NDP or Polling frame with no option for the delayed or
   aggregated feedback as defined in 11n (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 52
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 9

       – Strawpoll passes

Submission                  Slide 173                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #12 (BF Feedback 5a)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that compressed V matrix feedback, as defined in
   subclause 20.3.12.2.5, be the only feedback format for
   both VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc.
   802.11-10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 40
       – No: 25
       – Abs: 2

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission                 Slide 174                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #13 (BF Feedback 5b)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to require
   that compressed V matrix feedback, as defined in
   subclause 20.3.12.2.5, be one feedback format for both
   VHT SU beamforming and DL MU-MIMO (doc. 802.11-
   10/1105r0)?

       – Yes: 58
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 9

       – Strawpoll passes

Submission                  Slide 175                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #14 (BF Feedback 6)
 •    Do you support updating the spec framework to define the VHT
      compressed V feedback frame as an Action No ACK format with
       – Category = VHT
       – Action = Compressed Beamforming
       – Containing a VHT MIMO Control field with 1-byte Sounding sequence number,
         and other TBD subfields
       – Containing a Compressed Beamforming Report field
     and adding the following figure?

       – Yes: 56
                                          Order     Information
       – No: 3                            1         Category (VHT)
       – Abstain: 8                       2         Action (Compressed Beamforming)
                                          3         VHT MIMO Control (TBD)
                                          4         Compressed Beamforming Report
       – Strawpoll passes                           (TBD)

Submission                              Slide 176                           Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #15 (BF Feedback 7)

 • Do you support updating the spec framework to define
   Compressed Beamforming Report Field as shown in the
   next slide?

       – Yes: 60
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 6

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 177                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                SP #15—Proposed Spec Framework Text

• Insert a new section 6.x describing the Compressed
  Beamforming Report Field, by adopting the 11n
  subclause 7.3.1.29, and:

             • With extending Table 7-25i to the angle ordering to up to 8
               streams (refer to Appendix II)

             • With TBD extensions to 80MHz and 160MHz

             • With TBD extensions or modifications of 7-25f, on tone-
               grouping, and tone mapping.

             • With TBD extensions or modifications of Table 7-25j, on the
               number of bits used to quantize the angles.
Submission
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #16 (120 MHz Strawpoll)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992?
        • R3.1.E: The draft specification shall include support for an
          efficient channelization in China’s spectrum (5,725 ~ 5,850 MHz),
          where the total available channel bandwidth is up to 120 MHz.

       – Yes: 15
       – No: 15
       – Abs: 25

       – Strawpoll fails

Submission                        Slide 179                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #17 (160 MHz Tx Flow)

 • Do you support 160 MHz transmission flow as shown on
   slide 4 and to edit the specification framework document
   (11-09/0992) as shown on slide 11 of 10/1063r1?

       – Yes: 41
       – No: 5
       – Abs: 7

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 180                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


    Straw Poll #18 (Interleaver for 160 MHz)

 • Do you agree to further investigate interleaver and/or bit
   parser for 160MHz transmission?

       – Yes: 32
       – No: 6
       – Abs: 17

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 181                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


             Straw Poll #19 (256QAM Scaling)

 • Do you support to add the following language to Clause
   3.2.4.3 of the IEEE Specification Framework for TGac:
   ―The normalization factor, KMOD, for 256 QAM is 1 170 .‖ ?

       – Yes: 51
       – No: 0
       – Abs: 1

       – Strawpoll passes




Submission                  Slide 182                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        Straw Poll #20 (120 MHz Strawpoll 1)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992r13?
        • R3.1.E: The draft specification shall include support for an
          efficient channelization in China’s (5,725 ~ 5,850 MHz) spectrum.

       – Yes: 35
       – No: 1
       – Abs: 11

       – Strawpoll passes



Submission                        Slide 183                 Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


        Straw Poll #21 (120 MHz Strawpoll 2)

 • Do you support adding the following item into Section 3.1
   ―Channelization‖ in the specification framework document, 11-
   09/0992?
        • The total bandwidth of the channels defined for China shall be
          equal to or not less than 120 MHz.

       – Yes: 12
       – No: 23
       – Abs: 23

       – Strawpoll fails



Submission                        Slide 184                  Jun Zheng, Broadcom
November 2010                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0




             TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
              From Previous Sessions




Submission             Slide 185             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     Nov. 19, 2009
 • Document IEEE 802.11-09/1261r0 presented
       – Discussion related to Adhoc Procedure and Rules
       – Outcome of the discussion: N/A
 • Document IEEE 802.11-09/1258 r0 presented
       – Preamble proposal for IEEE 802.11ac
       – Outcome of the discussion: N/A




Submission                         Slide 186               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     Jan. 19, 2010 (1/2)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0070r0 presented
       – 802.11ac preamble by Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       – Discussion related to
             • numerology, GF mode, PAPR and why smoothing only in SU-MIMO
       – Outcome of the discussion: N/A
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0073r1 presented
       – GroupID Concept for Downlink MU-MIMO Transmission by
         Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
       – Discussion related to
             • number of STAs in a group, number of groups, re-use of groupID and
               possible length of non-resolvable LTF
       – Outcome of the discussion: N/A


Submission                              Slide 187                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     Jan. 19, 2010 (2/2)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0087r0 presented
       – Measured Channel Variation and Coherence Time in NTT Lab. by
         Yasushi Takatori (NTT)
       – Discussion related to
             • Number of people in the room, why introduce a squaring measure for
               channel variation and sub-carrier spacing of OFDM signals
       – Outcome of the discussion: agreed to include in TGac Channel
         Model Addendum Document




Submission                              Slide 188                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                       doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     Jan. 20, 2010 (1/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0130r0 presented
       – Proposed TGac Preamble by Yung-Szu Tu (Ralink Technology)
       – Discussion related to
             • Need of GF mode, impact of rotating 45 degree on detection
               performance, support for MU-MIMO and in which symbol detection is
               done
       – Outcome of the discussion: agreed to have more simulation about
         detection performance.




Submission                             Slide 189                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                      Jan. 20, 2010 (2/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0113r0 presented
       – Proposed Specification Framework edits for preamble structure
         and A-MPDU by Raja Banerjea (Marvell)
       – Discussion related to
             • whether it is due time to apply these edits or not
       – Outcome of the discussion: 4 straw polls as follow in next slides




Submission                                 Slide 190                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    Jan. 20, 2010 (3/4)
 • Straw poll #1:
       – “Do you support adding the stream and station limits defined in “11-10-
         0070r0 802.11ac preamble” to the spec framework using the edits to
         R3.2.1.D, R3.4.A, R3.4.B, R3.4.C and R4.D in “11-10-0113r0 proposed
         spec framework edits for preamble structure and a-mpdu” and forward to
         the TGac Task Group?”
       – Outcome of the straw poll: YES/NO/ABS: 22/16/8 (fails to forward to
         TG)
 • Straw poll #1-1:
       – “Do you support adding the stream and station limits defined in “11-10-
         0070r0 802.11ac preamble” to the spec framework using the edits to
         R3.2.1.D, R3.4.A, R3.4.B, R3.4.C and R4.D in “11-10-0113r0 proposed
         spec framework edits for preamble structure and a-mpdu” with all
         numbers as TBD and forward to the TGac Task Group?”
       – Outcome of the straw poll : YES/NO/ABS: 36/19/1 (fails to forward to
         TG)


Submission                             Slide 191                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                   Jan. 20, 2010 (4/4)
 • Straw poll #2:
       – “Do you support adding the preamble structure defined in “11-10-
         0070r0 802.11ac preamble” to the spec framework using the edits
         in section 3.2.1 of “11-10-0113r0 proposed spec framework edits
         for preamble structure and a-mpdu?”
       – Outcome of the straw poll: YES/NO/ABS: 19/13/6 (fails to
         forward to TG)
 • Straw poll #3:
       – “Do you support adding a Group ID field to the VHT MU PPDU
         SIG field to support client side stream demultiplexing as described
         in “11-10-0073r0 Group ID Concept for DL MU-MIMO?”
       – Outcome of the straw poll: YES/NO/ABS: 24/8/12 (passes to
         forward to TG)

Submission                           Slide 192               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                              doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

       TGac PHY AdHoc Conf. Call Minutes
                 Feb. 10, 2010
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0070r1 presented
       – 802.11ac preamble by Hongyuan Zhang and Raja Banerjea (Marvell)
       – Discussion related to
             •   Complexity issue related to max. number of MU users
             •   Impact on HT-SIG detection of 11n devices which utilize 2 HT-SIG symbols
             •   End-alignment of MU packets: padding or indication
             •   Bit size of GroupID representation
       – Outcome of the discussion: N/A
       – Attendee list
             •   Minho Cheong (ETRI), Jae Seung Lee (ETRI), Brian Hart (Cisco), Douglas Chan (Cisco)
             •   Youhan Kim (Atheros), Sean Coffey (Realtek), Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
             •   Allan Zhu (Samsung), Raja Banerjea (Marvell), Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
             •   Sudheer Grandhi (InterDigital), Yujin Noh (LG), Yongho Seok (LG), Peter Loc (Ralink)
             •   Sameer Vermani (Qualcomm), Yasushi Takatori (NTT)




Submission                                            Slide 193                             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 March 16, 2010 (1/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0316r0 presented
       – Presentation on preamble and spoofing of 11n devices
       – Discussion on if 11n devices that use 2 HT SIG symbols for auto-
         detection actually exist
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0359r0 presented
       – Preamble design and auto-detection for 11ac
       – 3 methods were presented, with rotation on alternating tones
       – Discussion on if 11n devices that use 2 HT SIG symbols for auto-
         detection actually exist




Submission                          Slide 194              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     March 16, 2010 (2/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0363r0 presented
       – Preamble presentation
       – SIG Field bit allocation
             • Per user distinction
             • For all users distinction
       – Sounding, channel estimation
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0070r4 presented
       – Preamble presentation
       – Auto-detection




Submission                                 Slide 195             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 16, 2010 (3/5)
 • Straw poll #1:
       – “Do you support adding a basic guideline on the numerology for
         11ac device described as in Section I of 11-10/0070r2, excluding
         slide 9 (max Number of users for MU remains TBD), to the spec
         framework document, 11-09-0992?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 79/0/3


 • Straw poll #2:
       – “Do you support adding the 11ac preamble structure with two
         SIGNAL fields (VHT-SIGA located before VHT-STF and VHT-
         SIGB located after VHT-LTFs) as in Section III (Slide 22) of 11-
         10/0070r2 to the spec framework document, 11-09-0992?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 70/0/16


Submission                           Slide 196             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 16, 2010 (4/5)
 • Straw poll #3:
       – “Do you support to have 2 OFDM symbols for VHT-SIGA and a
         single OFDM symbol for VHT-SIGB, and to edit the spec
         framework document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 54/22/13


 • Straw poll #4:
       – “Do you support to have BPSK on the 1st VHT-SIGA symbol and
         90-deg rotated BPSK (QBPSK) on the 2nd VHT-SIGA symbol for
         VHT auto-detection as in Section III (Slide 20) of 11-10/0070r2,
         and to edit the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
         accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 54/24/8


Submission                            Slide 197             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 16, 2010 (5/5)
 • Straw poll #5:
       – “Do you support to have BPSK on the 1st VHT-SIGA symbol and
         TBD on the 2nd VHT-SIGA symbol for VHT auto-detection, and
         to edit the spec framework document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 71/1/11




Submission                           Slide 198             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                     March 17, 2010 (1/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0370r0 presented
       –     Tone allocation
       –     DC tones
       –     Guard tones
       –     8 pilots tones proposed
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0362r0 presented
       –     MU Scheduling
       –     CSI
       –     MU grouping strategy
       –     Paging proposal
       –     Discussion on the proposal:


Submission                             Slide 199             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                  March 17, 2010 (2/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/00073r2 presented
       – Group ID Concept
       – Bits in VHT-SIG A
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0382r0 presented
       – SIG Field bit allocation
       – STBC
       – MCS




Submission                          Slide 200             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 17, 2010 (3/5)
 • Straw poll #1:
       – “Considering environments which MU-MIMO may have
         outstanding performances, do you agree to have further
         investigation on the grouping concept for MU-MIMO STA co-
         scheduling?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 35/19/17


 • Straw poll #2:
       – “Do you support adding the Spatial Stream Configuration Index
         (SSCI) field to VHT-SIG as described in 10/0362r0 and similar in
         10/0073r3, and editing the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
         accordingly?”
             • Postponed


Submission                            Slide 201             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 17, 2010 (4/5)
 • Straw poll #3:
       – “Do you support including TBD bits for Bandwidth and STBC in
         VHT-SIGA and including MCS field in VHT-SIGB, and editing
         the spec framework document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 47/5/7


 • Straw poll #4:
       – “Do you support allowing only equal modulation and coding
         scheme across all streams per user and stating this in the spec
         framework document, 11-09-0992?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 44/14/15


Submission                            Slide 202               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    March 17, 2010 (5/5)
 • Straw poll #5:
       – “Do you support to have one bit to indicate STBC mode (Alamouti
         scheme) and to edit the spec framework document, 11-09-0992,
         accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 49/18/12


 • Straw poll #6:
       – “Do you support adopting the value of GroupID (whether it is zero
         or not) as a method as described in Slide 5 of 11-10-0382r0 and
         editing the spec framework document, 11-09-0992, accordingly?”
             • Yes/No/Abs: 34/28/11


Submission                            Slide 203             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                May 17 PM#1, 2010 (1/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0568r0 presented
       – “Single User MCS Proposal” by Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on MCS including 256QAM for single-user MIMO
       – Discussion on exclusion of MCS9 in 20MHz mode due to
         fractional bits calculated, raised by Brian Hart (Cisco)
       – Discussion on simulation conditions (residual CFO,BW and so on)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1 presented
       – “Sounding and P Matrix” by Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on P matrix including new 6x6 DFT matrix
       – Discussion on the reason why staggered sounding needs to be
         excluded, concern was raised by Laurant (Orange)

Submission                         Slide 204              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                               doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    May 17 PM#1, 2010 (2/5)
 • Straw poll #1:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.3.F: The draft specification shall include SU MCS set consisting of
               modulation and coding levels as defined in Table on slide 9 except MCS 9 for
               20 MHz BW.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 68/9/8
 • Straw poll #2:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.1.J: All VHT transmissions shall have a preamble which contains a single
               section of long training fields, with each long training field multiplied by
               entries belonging to a single P matrix, to enable channel estimation at the
               receiver.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 33/15/28
Submission                                  Slide 205                    Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    May 17 PM#1, 2010 (3/5)
 • Straw poll #3:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.2.C: The draft specification shall include null data packet (NDP) as the
               only preamble format for sounding PPDUs.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 31/14/39
 • Straw poll #4:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.1.K: The long training fields consists of one, two, four, six or eight VHT
               long training fields (VHT-LTFs) that are necessary for demodulation of the
               VHT-Data portion of the PPDU or for channel estimation during an NDP
               packet.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 41/0/37

Submission                                    Slide 206                     Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    May 17 PM#1, 2010 (4/5)
 • Straw poll #5:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.1.K: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for one, two or four VHT-LTFs
               shall be the same as defined in 802.11n standard specification (Section
               20.3.9.4.6, Eq. (20-27)).
             • Yes/No/Abs: 67/0/9
 • Straw poll #6:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for six VHT-LTFs shall be as
               defined in slide 4 of 11-10/0566r2.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 42/6/29

Submission                                 Slide 207                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                            doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    May 17 PM#1, 2010 (5/5)
 • Straw poll #7:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for eight VHT-LTFs shall be as
               defined in slide 5 of 11-10/0566r2.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 65/0/14




Submission                                Slide 208                  Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (1/11)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0370r1 presented
       – “80MHz Tone Allocation” by Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       – Presentation on number of pilots and DC tones in 80MHz mode
       – Discussion on simulation conditions (nonlinearities, frequency
         offset and so on)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0578r0 presented
       –     “Preamble Parameters” by Richard Van Nee (Qualcomm)
       –     Presentation on L-LTF, L-STF format in VHT mixed-mode packet
       –     Presentation on tone allocation of VHT-STF, VHT-LTF / CSD
       –     Discussion on if equal-spaced CSD is suitable for enough
             performance even for 4 or more antenna cases

Submission                           Slide 209             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
               May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (2/11)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0588r0 presented
       – “Power Saving Feature Consideration” by Yujin Noh (LG)
       – Presentation on micro-sleep mode in several environments
       – Discussion on what is the major merit compared to using groupID-based
         power saving, raised by Minho Cheong (ETRI)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0548r1 presented
       – “80MHz Transmission Flow” by Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       – Presentation on design of BCC encoder and interleaver and their
         simulation results
       – Discussion on if it is reasonable that 600Mbps BCC encoder can be
         assumed without optimization, concern was raised by YungSzu Tu
         (Ralink)
       – Request to share justification results how to determine interleaver
         parameters
Submission                             Slide 210                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                          doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
               May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (3/11)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0534r0 presented
       – “Duration in L-SIG” by Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – Presentation on possibility to use duration in L-SIG as VHT length
       – Discussion on impact on any complexity in receiver state machine,
         concern was raised by Peter Loc (Ralink)
       – Discussion on if additional conversion into symbol units in this
         presentation is based on a specific MAC padding scheme, concern was
         raised by Minho Cheong (ETRI)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0619r0 presented
       – “Why We Need VHT SIG Length” by Yuichi Morioka (Sony)
       – Presentation to point out that using L-SIG as a duration information is
         risky and dangerous for a couple of corner cases
       – Discussion on if there is need to transmit HT PPDU longer than 2340
         bytes, which is the old limit of L-SIG length.
Submission                              Slide 211                  Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
               May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (4/11)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0550r0 presented
       – “VHT SIG Considerations” by Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       – Presentation on more simplified PPDU without VHT-SIG-B symbol
       – Discussion on if it is suitable to refer to the previous L-SIG false positive
         performance in order to reduce CRC bits into 4 bits
       – Many concerns are raised because VHT-SIG-B is already included in
         spec. framework document.
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0382r2 presented
       – “Bit Allocation” by Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on how many bits can be assigned for several elements in
         VHT-SIG field, such as non-sounding bits, smoothing bits and groupID
       – Discussion on how we can actually manage groupID field including
         overloading concept, which is thought as TBD for the time being.
       – Straw Poll was not conducted, deferred for later
Submission                               Slide 212                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                             doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (5/11)
 • Straw poll #1:
      –      Do you support to add to the specification frame work document
             (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             •   3.x Data Formats
                 – 3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 3 DC tones
                     at (0, ±1) in 80MHz VHT data field.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 21/15/4
 • Straw poll #2:
      –      Do you support to add to the specification frame work document
             (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9) - repeat after some more explanation
             •   3.x Data Formats
                 – 3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 3 DC tones
                     at (0, ±1) in 80MHz VHT data field.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 31/0/12
Submission                                 Slide 213                  Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (6/11)
 • Straw poll #3:
      –      Do you support to add to the specification frame work document (IEEE
             802.11-09/0992r9)
             •   3.x Data Formats
                 – 3.x.2 OFDM Modulation: The draft specification shall have 5 null tones at the
                      upper tone edges (tone indices 123, 124, 125, 126, 127) and 6 null tones at the lower
                      tone edges (tone indices -128, -127, -126, -125, -124, -123) of the 80MHz VHT
                      data.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 24/4/14
 • Straw poll #4:
      –      Do you support to add to the specification frame work document (IEEE
             802.11-09/0992r9)
             •   3.x Data Formats
                 – 3.x.1 Pilot Subcarriers: The draft specification shall have 8 pilot tones, with the
                      positions {±103, ±75, ±39, ±11}, for 80MHz VHT data.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 29/6/11

Submission                                        Slide 214                         Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                               doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (7/11)
 • Straw poll #5:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x L-STF definition: The 20 MHz L-STF pattern in the VHT preamble is as
               defined in 20.3.9.3.3 of Std 802.11n-2009.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/0/0
 • Straw poll #6:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The 20 MHz L-LTF pattern in the VHT preamble is as defined in
               20.3.9.3.4 of Std 802.11n-2009.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 37/0/0


Submission                                  Slide 215                   Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (8/11)
 • Straw poll #7:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The CSD (Cyclic Shift Diversity) values for up to 4 antennas in L-STF,
               L-LTF, and L-SIG are the same as the CSD values for the non-HT portion of
               the packet defined in Table 20-8 of Std 802.11n-2009.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 36/0/0
 • Straw poll #8:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The CSD (Cyclic Shift Diversity) values for up to 4 antennas in VHT-
               SIG-A are the same as the CSD values for the non-HT portion of the packet
               defined in Table 20-8 of Std 802.11n-2009.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/0/0

Submission                                   Slide 216                    Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (9/11)
 • Straw poll #9:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and subcarrier positions of L-STF are the
               same as those of the 20 MHz 11n L-STF in each 20 MHz subchannel.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/0/0
 • Straw poll #10:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and subcarrier positions of VHT-STF are the
               same as those of the 20 MHz 11n L-STF in each 20 MHz subchannel.
             • This straw poll is postponed.


Submission                                   Slide 217                    Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (10/11)
 • Straw poll #11:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and pilots, including subcarrier positions, of
               L-LTF, L-SIG, and VHT-SIG-A are the same as those for the 20 MHz 11n L-
               LTF and L-SIG in each 20 MHz subchannel.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/0/0
 • Straw poll #12:
       – Do you support adding to the specification framework document
         (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             • 3.2.x: The number of subcarriers and pilots, including subcarrier positions, of
               VHT-LTF and VHT-DATA symbols in 20 and 40 MHz channels are the same
               as those for 11n HT-LTF and HT-DATA in 20 and 40 MHz channels.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 35/0/3.

Submission                                    Slide 218                     Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                May 18 PM#2&3, 2010 (11/11)
 • Straw poll #13:
       – Do you support adding the following item into the specification
         framework document, 11-09/0992?
             • R3.2.X: The number of OFDM symbols in a VHT packet shall be computed
               using the length field in L-SIG.
             • Yes/No/Abs: 15/18/5




Submission                                Slide 219                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 20 AM#1, 2010 (1/7)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0628r1 presented
       – “802.11ac Preamble Design” by II-Gu Lee (ETRI)
       – Presentation on alternating tones in VHT-SIG-A2 and its merits in
         terms of sufficient performance and additional 11n coexistence
         functionality as well.
       – Discussion on how often its coexistence functionality is needed
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0549r0 presented
       – “TGac Preamble Auto Detection Comparisons” by Hongyuan
         Zhang (Marvell)
       – Presentation on preamble design revisited and its performance
         comparisons
       – Discussion on why 11ac miss-detection performance in this
         presentation is worse than L-SIG false positive performance.
Submission                          Slide 220              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                 May 20 AM#1, 2010 (2/7)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0382r2
       – “Bit Allocation” by Joonsuk Kim (Broadcom)
       – It was already presented on May 18.
       – Only straw polls related to this were conducted in this session.




Submission                           Slide 221                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                   TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                    May 20 AM#1, 2010 (3/7)
 • Straw poll #1:
      –      Do you support to do the following insertion to the specification frame
             work document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             •   R3.2.1.G: The 1st symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be BPSK modulated. The subsequent
                 symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be 90-degree rotated BPSK (QBPSK) modulated on the data
                 subcarriers whose indices are 4n+1, 4n+2, 4n+3 and BPSK modulated on the data
                 subcarriers whose indices are 4n (n=0,1,2,..11) for VHT auto-detect.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 33/34/11
 • Straw poll #2:
      –      Do you support to do the following changes to the specification frame
             work document (IEEE 802.11-09/0992r9)
             •   R3.2.1.G: The 1st symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be BPSK modulated. The subsequent
                 symbol(s) second symbol of VHT-SIG-A shall be 90-degree rotated BPSK (QBPSK)
                 modulated on its data tones for VHT auto-detect.
             •   Yes/No/Abs: 36/29/11


Submission                                    Slide 222                      Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                   May 20 AM#1, 2010 (4/7)
 • Straw poll #3:
       – Do you support excluding smoothing bit in VHT-SIG and stating
         this in the spec framework document, 11-09-0992?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 54/5/11
 • Straw poll #4:
       – Do you support excluding non-sounding bit in VHT-SIG and
         stating this in the spec framework document, 11-09-0992?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/11/24




Submission                            Slide 223             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                   May 20 AM#1, 2010 (5/7)
 • Straw poll #5:
       – Do you support the specific usage of a GroupID value of zero as
         described in Slide 6 of 11-10-0382r2 and stating this in the spec
         framework document, 11-09-0992?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 47/0/21
 • Straw poll #6:
       – Do you support 6 bits for GroupID field (i.e., y=6 in slide 6) and
         stating this in the spec framework document, 11-09-0992?
             • This straw poll is postponed until July meeting accepting author’s
               suggestions




Submission                                Slide 224                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                   May 20 AM#1, 2010 (6/7)
 • Straw poll #7:
      –      Do you support allowing only the same modulation and the same
             coding rate and coding type across all streams belonging to each
             user for multi user case as well, and stating this in the spec
             framework document, 11-09-0992?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 51/2/5
 • Straw poll #8:
       – Do you support to have one bit to indicate STBC mode (Alamouti
         scheme) and stating this in the spec framework document, 11-09-
         0992?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 57/0/4



Submission                             Slide 225              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                           doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                  TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
                   May 20 AM#1, 2010 (7/7)
 • Straw poll #9:
      –      Do you support bringing Autodect decision into TG?
             • Yes/No/Abs: 38/26/12
             • It passes to move to task group motion (50% threshold met to just
               move to task group)




Submission                               Slide 226                 Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 12 AM1 Session, 2010 (1/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0772r0 presented
       – “VHT Packet Duration Signaling” by Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – Presentation on how to signal VHT packet duration, which
         requires 2 bits in VHT SIG-A to indicate GI type and solve short
         GI packet length ambiguity problem as well
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #1 and #2 were done. (described in detail in
         July Agenda Pages) : both failed




Submission                           Slide 227               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 12 AM1 Session, 2010 (2/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0771r0 presented
       – “Phase Tracking During VHT-LTF” by Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – Presentation on several suggestions to improve 11ac phase tracking
         performance, such as pilot insertion in VHT-LTF, SIMO spatial
         mapping for VHT-LTF and modification of 6x6 P matrix (for
         avoiding spectral lines due to non-random patterns)
       – Some questions to check that every spatial stream has the same
         pilot tone, by Yung-Szu Tu (Ralink Technology)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #3 and #4 were done. (described in detail in
         July Agenda Pages) : both pass




Submission                           Slide 228               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 12 AM1 Session, 2010 (3/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0778r0 presented
       – “120MHz PHY Transmission” by Zhendong Luo (CATR)
       – Presentation on 120MHz transmission mode to make VHT
         services easily available also for China, where 160MHz
         transmission cannot be used
       – Discussion on its feasibility in terms of insufficient guard band,
         raised by Eldad Perahia (Intel)
       – Supportive comments that it may be possible to try to find a way to
         solve some technical problems for China market, by Peter Loc
         (Ralink) and Minho Cheong (ETRI)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #5 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : failed

Submission                          Slide 229               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 12 AM1 Session, 2010 (4/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0779r0 presented
       – “VHT-LTF Design for IEEE802.11ac” by Zhendong Luo (CATR)
       – Presentation on applying CAZAC code, one of Zadoff-Chu
         sequences, to VHT-LTF, which guarantees good channel
         estimation performance and lower overhead as well
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #6 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : failed




Submission                          Slide 230              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 12 AM1 Session, 2010 (5/5)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0802r0 presented
       – “VHT-LTF Sequence for 80MHz” by Sameer Vermani
         (Qualcomm)
       – Presentation on newly derived VHT-LTF sequence and phase
         rotation pattern for VHT-LTF after exhaustive simulations to
         minimize the PAPR. Applying this phase rotation pattern also to
         remaining parts of PPDU (legacy part and other VHT part as well)
       – Discussion on the possibility to find out another phase rotation
         pattern (VHT part) with lower PAPR, such as using +j or –j in that
         pattern, raised by Daewon Lee (LG)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #7, #8 and #9 were done. (described in
         detail in July Agenda Pages) : only straw poll #7 passes

Submission                          Slide 231               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM1 Session, 2010 (1/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0791r1 presented
       – “Phase Rotation for the 80MHz 802.11ac Mixed Mode Packet” by
         Leonardo Lanante Jr. (Kyushu Institute of Technology)
       – Presentation on PAPR reduction using phase rotations [1 j 1 -j] on
         every 20MHz band, applied to both legacy part and VHT part of
         11ac PPDU
       – Discussion on the potential compatibility issue in OBSS, raised by
         Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       – Discussion on synchronization performance with a 40MHz band,
         raised by Richard van Nee (Qualcomm)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #10 and #11 were done. (described in detail
         in July Agenda Pages) : both failed

Submission                           Slide 232              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                   doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM1 Session, 2010 (2/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0548r2 presented
       – “80MHz Transmission Flow” by Sudhir Srinivasa (Marvell)
       – Presentation on transmitter block diagram, PHY padding, BCC
         encoding, stream parsing and frequency interleaver design when
         80MHz transmission
       – Supportive comments on PHY padding, tail in that order for
         efficient receiver operation, by Minho Cheong (ETRI)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #12, #13, #14, #15 and #16 were done.
         (described in detail in July Agenda Pages) : all pass.




Submission                         Slide 233              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM1 Session, 2010 (3/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0811r1 presented
       – “Pilot Sequence for VHT-DATA” by Richard van Nee
         (Qualcomm)
       – Presentation on extended pilot sequence whose size is increased
         into 8 for pilot allocation in 80MHz and 160MHz as well
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #17 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : passes.




Submission                           Slide 234               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM1 Session, 2010 (4/4)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0827r1 presented
       – “Straw Polls and Motions on 256QAM and BW: Optional-
         Mandatory Features” by Vinko Erceg (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on various questions on which are to be selected
         between mandatory and optional about 20/40/80/160MHz and
         256QAM
       – Straw poll : Straw polls from #18 to #27 were done. (described in
         detail in July Agenda Pages) : Straw poll #19, #20, #21, #25 and
         #27(BW) pass




Submission                          Slide 235               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (1/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0844r0 presented
       – “Padding Using Variable Un-puncturing and Repetition” by Kiran
         (Ralink Technology)
       – Presentation on improved padding method using variable un-
         puncturing and repetition, which enables some short per-user
         packet in MU-MIMO to adopt more robust MCS or code rate
       – Discussion on how receiver get to know whether un-puncturing is
         used or not, raised by VK Jones (Qualcomm)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #27(Efficient Padding) was done.
         (described in detail in July Agenda Pages) : failed




Submission                         Slide 236             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (2/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0774r0 presented
       – “160MHz Transmissions” by Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – Presentation on key features related to 160MHz preamble, such as
         how to handle LO phase from each 80MHz band, channel bonding,
         preamble sequence, phase rotation and pilot allocation
       – Straw poll : Straw polls from #28 to #32(160MHz) were done.
         (described in detail in July Agenda Pages) : all pass




Submission                         Slide 237              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (3/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0818r0 presented
       – “Why Implicit TxBF is Better for 11ac” by Yuichi Morioka (Sony)
       – Presentation on the reasons why it is needed to keep implicit TxBF
         in the 11ac standard as in the 11n standard, that is, less complexity,
         lower overhead and more robustness to varying channel compared
         to explicit TxBF
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #32(Implicit TxBF) was done. (described in
         detail in July Agenda Pages) : passes. But, this straw poll is not for
         moving forward to TG motion but just a sounding out question.




Submission                            Slide 238               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (4/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0750r0 presented
       – “11ac Auto-detection Using the VHT SIG-A Field” by Vish
         Ponnampalam (MediaTek)
       – Presentation on applying S-QPSK(Spread-QPSK) to the 2nd
         symbol of VHT SIG-A to improve auto-detection performance
         more and solve potential compatibility problem with 11n devices
         which use two symbols of HT-SIG as well
       – Supportive comments that suggested method may be perfect if it
         can also show its good false alarm performance to 11a packet, by
         Minho Cheong (ETRI)




Submission                          Slide 239              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (5/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0857r0 presented
       – “256QAM Mapping” by Joseph Lauer (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on 256QAM constellation with the use of Gray
         coding
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #33 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : passes




Submission                           Slide 240               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 13 AM2 Session, 2010 (6/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0821r0 presented
       – “VHT Packet Length Calculation” by Peter Loc (Ralink
         Technology)
       – Presentation on how to calculate VHT packet length with the use
         of two types of length information from L-SIG and VHT SIG-A as
         well, that is, length field in VHT SIG-A indicates multiple of n
         bytes to be added or subtracted from the length field in L-SIG to
         form the actual length
       – Discussion on the benefit of this method, such as no limitation of
         PPDU size and enabling TXOP mechanism




Submission                          Slide 241               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (1/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0820r0 presented
       – “MCS Selection and Padding Equations” by Sudhir Srinivasa
         (Marvell)
       – Presentation on modification of MCS table and its related padding
         equations because some previous MCS need to be excluded for
         20MHz and 80MHz to avoid a prohibitive number of extra
         padding symbols
       – Some questions on suggested padding equations, by Daewon Lee
         (LG)
       – Straw poll : Straw polls from #34 to #37 were done. (described in
         detail in July Agenda Pages) : all pass


Submission                          Slide 242              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (2/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0890r0 presented
       – “Phase Rotations for VHT 80MHz” by Sameer Vermani
         (Qualcomm)
       – Presentation on modified suggestions (a little different from those
         in 0802r0) to apply phase rotation pattern [1 -1 -1 -1] to every
         20MHz channel of only VHT part of PPDU, which includes VHT-
         STF, VHT-LTF, VHT SIG-A, VHT SIG-B and VHT Data
       – Discussion on whether using only real values in phase rotation
         pattern can have a minimized PAPR, by Thet Htun Khine (Radrix
         Corporation)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #38 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : passes

Submission                           Slide 243              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (3/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0843r0 presented
       – “VHT-STF for 11ac” by Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – Presentation on design of VHT-STF sequence, phase rotation
         pattern and CSD table for VHT part of SU-MIMO frame
       – Question on how to get CSD value from 100ns to 600ns, by Minho
         Cheong (ETRI)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #39 and #40 were done. (described in detail
         in July Agenda Pages) : all pass unanimously




Submission                          Slide 244               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                     doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (4/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0916r0 presented
       – “Cyclic Shift for More Than 4 Antennas in Non-VHT Portion” by
         Yung-Szu Tu (Ralink Technology)
       – Presentation on several suggestions to how to choose proper CSD
         value for more than 4 antennas in non-VHT portion of PPDU, such
         as constraint within 200ns, different values for different antennas,
         and applying the same value as that of legacy part to VHT SIG-A
       – Supportive comments because constraint within 200ns is already
         introduced in the 11n standard, by Eldad Perahia (Intel)
       – Straw poll : Straw poll #41 was done. (described in detail in July
         Agenda Pages) : passes unanimously


Submission                           Slide 245               Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                      doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (5/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0795r2 presented
       – “PAPR Reduction of Legacy Portion of VHT PLCP Preamble” by
         Daewon Lee (LG)
       – Presentation on several factors which can influence PAPR
         properties, and recommendation that PAPR reduction method
         needs to be separately applied to legacy part and VHT part of the
         PLCP preamble.
       – Question on whether there are any other benefit to apply 25ns(half-
         BW) CSD, besides PAPR reduction, by Minho Cheong (ETRI)
       – Discussion on that suggested phase rotation [1 j 1 j] for legacy part
         does not have quite smaller PAPR rather than that of [1 -1 -1 -1],
         raised by Sudhir Grandi (InterDigital)

Submission                           Slide 246                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                        doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             July 15 AM2 Session, 2010 (6/6)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/0785r0 presented
       – “PHY Power Saving Features for 11ac” by Byungwoo Kang (LG)
       – Presentation on a couple of approaches to enable micro-sleep mode in
         receiver operation, such as link differentiation between DL and UL,
         introduction of PHY ID in VHT SIG-B with the use of AID (compressed
         or not) and so on.
       – Comments on that straw poll text is contrary to the text about VHT SIG-B
         which is already passed in TG motion, by Vish Ponnampalam (MediaTek)
       – Comments on that it is needed to research further in a different way
         because there is no room to allocate additional bits in VHT SIG-B, by
         Daewon Lee (LG)
       – Discussion on the possibility for groupID to duplicate when OBSS, raised
         by Minho Cheong (ETRI)


Submission                             Slide 247                Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             Sept 13, 2010 Evening Session (1/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1052r0 presented
       – “VHT SIG-A and VHT SIG-B Field Structure” by Richard Van
         Nee (Qualcomm)
       – Some new bit definition: beamforming bit
       – Bit ordering in VHT SIG-A and VHT-SIG B
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1083r0 presented
       – “Phase Rotations for 80 MHz” by Sameer Vermani (Qualcomm)
       – Non-VHT phase rotations were presented for 80 MHz, same as for
         VHT portion of the packet




Submission                        Slide 248              Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             Sept 13, 2010 Evening Session (2/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1086r2 presented
       – “CSD Values for Legacy Portion” by Leonardo Lanante (Kyushu
         Inst of Techn)
       – CSD values are proposed for Legacy portion of the packet
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1076r0 presented
       – “60MHz and 120MHz Transmission Options” by Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – 60MHz and 120MHz transmission options were defined and
         presented




Submission                       Slide 249             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             Sept 13, 2010 Evening Session (3/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1109r0 presented
       – “Spectral Mask and Flatness” by Ron Porat (Broadcom)
       – Spectral mask based on 11a mask is proposed
       – Spectral flatness is relaxed
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1089r1 presented
       – “Max per BCC Data Rate” by Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
       – 600 Mbps was proposed for max BCC rate




Submission                        Slide 250             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                    doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

                 TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
               Sept 14, 2010 AM1 Session (1/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1105r0 presented
       –     “Explicit Sounding and Feedback” by Hongyuan Zhang (Marvell)
       –     BF protocol was presented
       –     NDP frame structure
       –     BF protocol
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1062r1 presented
       – “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization for China” by
         Zhendong Luo (CATR)
       – Channelization presented
       – 120MHz concept prested
       – Max Tx power analyzed


Submission                           Slide 251             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             Sept 14, 2010 AM2 Session (2/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1063r1 presented
       – “160 MHz Transmission Flow” by Youhan Kim (Atheros)
       – 3 Tx flow possibilities were presented
       – Flow that reuses most of 80MHz hardware is preferred
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1118r1 presented
       – “Interleavers for 160MHz Transmission” by Jianhan Liu
         (Mediatek)
       – Tine interleaver structure presented for 160MHz




Submission                        Slide 252             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                                  doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0

               TGac PHY AdHoc Minutes
             Sept 14, 2010 AM2 Session (3/3)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1090r0 presented
       – “256QAM Scaling” by Jun Zheng (Broadcom)
 • Document IEEE 802.11-10/1062r1 presented
       – “RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization for China” by
         (CATR)
       – 2 updated strawpolls




Submission                         Slide 253             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong
November 2010                         doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1306r0


                     References
 • 11-09-1175-r0-00ac-AdHoc Groups Scope.ppt
 • 11-09-1181-00-00ac-ad-hoc-lifecycle.ppt
 • 11-09-1167-00-00ac-tgac-ad-hoc-group-operation-and-
   chair-selection-procedure.pptx
 • 11-09-0838-02-00ac-supporting-document-for-tgac-
   evaluation-methodology.ppt
 • 11-09-0451-15-00ac-tgac-functional-requirements-and-
   evaluation-methodology.doc
 • 11-09-0992-13-00ac-proposed-specification-framework-
   for-tgac.doc

Submission                Slide 254             Erceg, Banerjea, and Cheong

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:90
posted:10/9/2011
language:English
pages:254