IEEE 802.15 <subject>

1
Project IEEE P802.19 Coexistence TAG Submission
Title Coexistence Classes Update Date Submitted
13 November, 2002 Source Jim Lansford, Company
Mobilian Corporation Address 7431 NW Evergreen
Pkwy, Hillsboro, OR 97124 Voice1 405 377 6170,
FAX [phone], E-Mail jim.lansford_at_mobilia
n.com Re Abstract Additional work on the
concept of coexistence classes, where the
coexistence of one system with another is
assigned a score Purpose For discussion Notice T
his document has been prepared to assist the IEEE
P802.19. 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 P802.19.
2
Coexistence Classes Update

• Jim Lansford
• jim.lansford_at_mobilian.com
• 1 405 377 6170
• Henry Nielsen
• ST Microelectronics
• henry.nielsen_at_st.com

3
Overview

• Goals Allow coexistence to be scored or graded
• WGs can use in selection criteria
• 802.19 can use to grade proposals
• Initial presentation in September
• Levels 0-4
• Augmented over time to allow more fine-grained
• Need more help to move this forward

4
Review Varying facets of Coexistence

• Ability of a system to
• Perform its own tasks, possibly in hostile
  environment
• Detect other systems
• Adapt to presence of other systems
• Reduce impact of its operation on other systems
• Negotiate with other systems
• Are to be evaluated both in-band and out-of-band
• Depend strongly on separation distance
• Are defined and conceived of differently in each
  organization

5
Review Proposed Coexistence Classes

• 0 Ignorant of possibility that other systems or
  protocols may exist
• Aware that others may exist, expects them to make
  any adaptations
• Aware that others may exist, unilaterally acts to
  reduce impact
• Actively detects others, unilaterally acts to
  reduce impact on them
• Actively detects others, negotiates with them to
  optimize mutual performance
• A device or system may be characterized by
  different coexistence classes in different bands.
  e.g. An AFH Bluetooth WPAN is class-3 wrt
  802.11b, but may be class-0 for some proprietary
  ISM systems

6
Possible Grading Scale
Standard X Standard Y Standard Z Other? (microwave, radar, cordless phone, etc.)
Proposal a 0 2 3 5
Proposal b 1 3 5 2
Proposal 3 2 1 0

• Included criteria such as throughput degradation,
  latency, jitter, etc.
• Proposal evaluation who does?
• How objective can this grading scale be?
• Can 802.19 really do this? (or back on WG to
  assist)

7
Next steps

• PHY vs PHYMAC evaluation
• SIR can give 1st cut at throughput degradation
• Interference quantifies problem, grading gives
  indication of expected improvement
• Need to flesh out grading criteria
• Examples AFH, 802.15.2 AWMA, 802.15.2 PTA
• 802.11h (DFS/TPC)
• Can this be turned into a general procedure?