Minutes of 5GWIAG (Monterey)

Minutes of Wireless LAN IAG Monterey, California Friday, September 13, 2002 01:00 – 4:30 PM

Amer Hassan – Chairman Erik Schylander – vice-chair Garth Hillman – Secretary

Contact web site - http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/tech/network/wireless/5GHz.asp Email reflector - [email protected]

Attendance = 36

Name Affiliation

*Hidenori Aoki DoCoMo *Tokashi Aramaki Panasonic *Marc Berejka Microsoft *Kiran Challapali Philips *Steve Crowley DoCoMo US Labs *Peter Ecclesine Cisco Systems *Lars Falk Telia *David Halasz Cisco *Thomas Haslestad Telenor *Amer Hassan Microsoft *Garth Hillman AMD *Bob Huang Sony *Bob Huang Sony Electronics *Kevin Kahn Intel *Stuart Kerry Philips *Gunter Kleindl Siemens *Bruce Kraemer Intersil *Jim Lansford Mobilian *Sheung Li Atheros Communications *Preston Marshall Defense Advanced Research Agency *Pratik Mehta Dell *Mike Moreton Synad Tech *Oliver Muelhens Philips *Erwin Noble Philips *Richard Paine Boeing *Jim Raab LinCom Wireless *Erik Schylander Philips *Yoram Soloman Texas Instruments *Carl Stevenson Agere Systems *Teik-Kheong (TK) Tan Philips *Madan Venugopal Athena Semiconductors *Pierre de Vries Microsoft *Tim Wakeley Hewlett Packard *Fujio Watanabe DoCoMo USA Labs *Chris Zegelin Symbol Tech

Executive Summary:

1. First meeting since January 2002; topics were spectrum centric 2. Pierre de Vries from Microsoft Strategy office gave a talk (no doc.) on “Broadband Consumer Opportunities” and discussed acquiring more spectrum and spectrum etiquette 3. Preston Marshall from DARPA gave a presentation on Project XG which addressed effective access to spectrum 4. Erik Schylander from Philips gave a presentation on paradigm shifts in the Wireless Industry (interfaces between wireless networks worldwide) and the role the IAG could play to optimize the benefit for the industry from the opportunity such shifts present 5. Presentations and minutes available at http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/tech/network/wireless/5GHz.asp

Discussion

1. Amer Hassan called the meeting to order at 1:05 PM 2. Amer Hassan presented the following agenda: a. Kick off (Amer) b. Roll Call 5 min c. Comments on the report from last meeting (Garth) 10 min d. WNG Update (Bruce) e. Presentations i. Microsoft (Pierre de Vries) 40 min ii. DARPA (Preston Marshall) 30 min f. Discussion 60 min g. Requirements, Applications and Scenarios (Erik) i. What architecture? ii. Inter-working with the Internet iii. Is Ethernet the only interface? iv. What security framework? v. What QoS framework? vi. What network topology? vii. Heterogeneous networking viii. Role of IPv6? ix. Inter-working with mobile systems? h. Conclusions and next meeting 3. Amer Hassan - Scope of IAG a. Next generation features b. Spectrum agnostic c. Not a standards developing organization 4. Bruce Kraemer gave an Update on WNG a. IEEE joined WIG

© 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. b. Formation of Study Group to extend IEEE802.11 standard to include new 4.9 and 5.0 GHz bands in Japan 5. Garth Hillman reviewed of Minutes from the last IAG meeting in January 6. Pierre de Vries (office of strategy reporting to CTO who reports to Bill Gates) Subject: Broadband Consumer Opportunities a. Problem = insufficient unlicensed spectrum world wide b. WLANs should not be considered a 2nd class petitioner c. Type of networks: i. Home - all devices are wireless enabled ii. Neighborhood – multi-hop mesh d. Unlicensed spectrum means decentralized ownership and control i. Decentralize control fosters more free form applications ii. Decentralized ownership fosters lower cost and higher volume e. Not enough spectrum to satisfy the emerging applications and number of devices so what can we do: i. Improve spectrum efficiency ii. Petition for more unlicensed spectrum iii. Adopt spectrum etiquette iv. Communicate with your contacts in Washington v. Technical comment has most weight vi. Issues Discussion 1. US only has 1 vote at WRC 2. Not enough technical content in our petitions 3. The REAL justification for EXISTING spectrum allocations is hard to obtain and therefore counteract 4. Now is the time to act since we are at an inflection point with government – currently a Bill being crafted that includes making additional 5GHz spectrum available 5. If unlicensed/decentralized “who do you call if interference?” There is no one! Recall the existing 2.4 ISM band pollution 6. How do you regulate? You don’t vii. Alternatives: a. Spectrum etiquette b. Standards 1. RRM – making real time spectrum information available 2. Microsoft could make Directory and real time data bases integral to PCs viii. Possible Solutions Ladder and issues a. Do nothing other than DFS,TPC i. =>Channel Avoidance (inefficient) b. Type Avoidance of other equivalent types of devices at that location i. but there will be rogue radios

© 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. c. Standards - Part 15 says must accept interference – coexist - but not oriented towards DATA – one of the root issues ix. Open Discussion: a. Spectrum is like real estate and as such it is finite and valuable so why should it be free? b. avoid or coexist, (HDTV repeater example- dynamic power control within the technology itself) c. standards won’t help in consumer space d. we need to be cautious about what we ask the FCC for, we just might get it! e. better to let market forces do the policing f. FCC regulations are outdated – e.g., peak to average spec g. It really comes down to the value of real estate which is the way the rest of the world views it h. FCC reluctant to regulate in the unlicensed bands x. Pierre’s Preference - Coordination (listen before talk; signaling channel) i. How does signaling help? 1. contend among different tech types for medium 2. describe capability 3. negotiate (not FCC domain at least initially) 7. DARPA – Preston Marshall (DOD) Subject – XG Project a. Problem Statement – the issue is Access to spectrum not the lack of spectrum b. Highlights from presentation: i. Advanced Tech product 3-5 years out (e.g. Internet) ii. Zero setup time iii. Access is a regulatory problem iv. Issue is access to spectrum which is in fact adequate and highly unused v. XG project Goal = at least a factor of 10 (20 expected) improvement in spectrum efficiency using the following functions: 1. Sense 2. Characterize 3. React 4. Adapt vi. Program 1. Define Measurements 2. Set Policy-based Controls 3. Define Protocol Set (MAC) 4. Implementation (PHY) vii. Behavior is key especially if ALL (well most) spectrum is made available ON A CONTROLLED ACCESS BASIS

© 2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. viii. Protocol 1. mirror original ARPA/BBN Internet protocol RFC Process 2. light weight, 3. Open standards 4. PHY independent ix. Time Line - Protocol and hardware implementation by FY04 x. Vision - IS YOUR DEVICE XG ENABLED? 8. Wireless Requirements – Erik Schylander a. Paradigm Shift Observations i. Initially Replace wire in homogeneous network ii. Future wireless heterogeneous network iii. Not just PC, PDAs iv. Moveable APs v. Applications are converging – sharing, Internet, VoIP, streaming, messenger vi. WL Inter-working – 1. Personal (BT, Wi-Fi, WiMedia…) 2. Operators (WISPr, Mobile, Cable, Broadcast …) 3. At interface Roaming, Billing, Security, QoS get solved vii. Is part of IAG’s charter to foster a Generic Global Interface? 1. Note, that WIG is focusing on WWAN and WLAN but where does that leave BT, WiMedia on the device side and Cable, Broadcast etc. on the operator side b. Discussion i. Market forces will do the job ii. How can operators make money from WLANs iii. What is successful Hot Spot Provider business model iv. What is really needed is a common discovery protocol v. What role could/should WECA play? vi. T-Mobile, Voice Stream, Sprint have participated in WECA vii. Carriers want to own the packet if for no other reason than security viii. Security translates into billing 9. Next Steps a. Circulate brainstorming email to get comment on direction of IAG before next meeting 10. Next meeting a. Early December in conjunction with ETSI-BRAN meeting 11. Meeting was adjourned at 4:20PM