June, 2005 IEEE 802.15-05-0373-00-004a
Project / IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)Title / Minutes of 15.4a Band Plan Subgroup Conference Call on Tuesday June 28th
Date Submitted / [28 June 2005]
Source / [Saeid Safavi]
[Wideband Access Inc.]
[10225 Barnes Canyon Road, Suite A209, San Diego, CA] / Voice:[+01 858-642-9114]
Fax:[+01 858-642-2037]
E-mail:[
Re: / 802.15.4a Band Plan
Abstract / Minutes of Band Plan Subgroup Conference Call
Purpose / Minutes of Band Plan Subgroup Conference Call
Notice / This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.
Release / The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15.
Minutes of 15.4a Band Plan Subgroup Conference Call on Tuesday June 28th
Participants:
- Shahriar Emami
- Tino Corral
- Ismail Lakkis
- Vern Brethour
- Michael Mc Laughlin
- Francios Chin
- Saeid Safavi
The call Started at 14:05 GMT after the roll cal.
Saeid gave a brief description of the band plan subgroup status. The subject definition of Band Plan related terms was discussed. Shahriar mentioned that the Criteria no. 3 (Doc# 15-050-0355-00-004a) may deviate a little bit from the ABCD merger agreement therein the integer relations between parameters was addressed by chip rate and other frequencies, rather than chip rate or channel separation and other frequencies. Vern and Saeid mentioned that although the ABCD merger is the base line, we do not need to be limited by it, particularly as a more precise definition of the chip (and other parameters) has evolved after extensive discussions on the reflector and conference calls. The attendees agreed to leave item no. 3 as is.
Michael introduced his diagram (Doc # 15-05-0359-01-004a) and suggested that definition of PRF should stay as pulse repetition frequency and when there are busts in symbols, we may define burst repetition frequency to address this. After some discussion but Michael, Ismail, Saeid and others, it was decided to give separate definitions of PRF and BRF on page 2 of Doc# 15-050-035500-004a. Also, page 5 of the same document, should be modified by adding BRF to other parameters mentioned under criteria 3 & 4.
Francios presented a brief summary of his band plan proposal (Doc# 15-05-0284-00-004a). He mentioned that the main highlight of this proposal (comparing to the adopted band plan) is its larger margin to 3.1 GHz, as well as, the fact that it supports larger Fcomp which can aid easier to implement PLL loop filter and based on that he suggested weather we should consider higher Fcomp as a favorable criteria. Ismail argued that the 3.1GHz margin is important so long as it provides certain isolation satisfying the FCC mandatory regulation for 3.1 GHz, but adding to the 3.1 band margin would reduce the margin to 4.9 GHz band (about 19 MHz less margin to 4.9 than the adopted proposal). Although the 4.9 GHz margin is desirable not mandatory, it is more difficult to implement a filter with sharp response at 4.9 as compared to 3.1 and therefore the new plan may impose further difficulties to the implementer. Ismail also mentioned that there are 8 different band plan possibilities (including Farncios’ plan) which have the desirable integer relationship of center frequencies (the 7, 8, and 9) and he is ok with any of them (but he believes that adopted plan is practical in terms of implementation of filter at the 4.9 MHz end).
Regarding the higher Fcomp point, Ismail mentioned that with the adopted plan Fcomp can be as high as 6.5 MHz, for 13 MHz Xtal. Farncios agued that this my be right for 13 MHz Xtal, but how about other Xtals? Ismail mentioned that it is implementation related and if the SSB mixing architecture is used, the Fcomp will be high for all Xtals. After this discussion the group agreed to leave the criteria as is.
Francois inquired what the next step should be? Saeid mentioned that he has sent an e-mail over the reflector last week, which was asking all of the proposers’ to prepare a document addressing their proposal’s consistency to the approved list of criteria mentioned in Doc#15-050-0355-00-004a. Francios suggested Saeid send a spread sheet, similar to the initial band plan summary document (Doc#15-05-0241-00-004a) and let the proposers complete it. The call adjourned at 14:50 GMT.
Submission Page 1 Saeid Safavi Wideband Access Inc