submissionkwak/johnson, interdigital/nortel1 link quality strawpole joe kwak/brian johnson doc: ieee...
Post on 04-Jan-2016
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel1
Link Quality Strawpole
Joe Kwak/Brian Johnson
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel2
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Purpose TGk has several different proposals for
new Link Quality Indicator. TGk members have widely varying
opinions on each proposal. Progress may be accelerated with
better understanding of group opinions. This series of strawpole questions is
designed to provide direction to contributors to continue this work.
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel3
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #1 Does TGk need a QUANTITATIVE link
quality indicator?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel4
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #2 Is a “black box” specification
preferred over a detailed functional, “how-to” specification which mandates a certain implementation?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel5
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #3 If TGk decides to specify HOW to
implement a quality indicator, is EVM the best basis for an implementation spec?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel6
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #4 Is a tabular performance specification
(specifying indicator performance at limited number of points) adequate?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel7
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #5 Should the link quality indicator
accurately reflect output quality in both AWGN and fading conditions (using variance adjustment or equivalent)?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel8
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #6 Would members support a link quality
measurement based on OFDM pilot tones?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel9
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #7 Would members support, as mandatory,
any signal quality spec that will likely require a silicon revision to claim 11k compliance?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel10
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #8 Would members support, as optional,
a signal quality spec that will likely require a silicon revision to claim 11k compliance?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel11
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Link Quality Question #9 Would members support reserving and
defining the required bit fields for a future signal quality measurement that could be defined as mandatory in TGn?
YES _______ NO _______ ABSTAIN _______
Submission Kwak/Johnson, InterDigital/Nortel12
doc: IEEE 802.11-03/970r0November 2003
Other Key Questions? Are there other similar questions
which we should poll to better determine direction for this work??
top related