Re: stds-80220-requirements: Section 4.1.2 Spectral Efficiency
John,
Besides the actual numbers, I think we need to understand why we
should separate uplink and downlink spectral efficiencies. I think
Dan mentioned this issue in his own submission on this subject. The only
reason I can see for making such a separation is to underline the
need for greater downlink capacity. However, the PAR already took
this into consideration by adding to the single spectral efficiency,
separate and asymmetric requirements for the uplink and downlink
aggregate throughputs. So, unless there is a good reason for doing
otherwise, I propose that we maintain a single spectral efficiency
target ( > X b/s/Hz/sector @ 3km) unless there is a good reason for
doing otherwise. Proposals can then use whatever technique they
need/want to use to meet the UL and DL data rate requirements.
Mike
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 11:55:59AM -0600, Humbert, John J [NTWK SVCS] wrote:
> Michael,
>
> For the most part the new proposal does a good job of addressing the
> issues raised on the last conference call. The problem with the new
> proposal is in the last section dealing with target values.
>
> In the last conference call the group agreed on a target value of 2
> bits/hertz/sector at 3km/hr. The question on the table was whether or
> not there needed to be another target value for a higher speed.
>
> The target values in this section are consistent with the PAR because
> the PAR specifies 1 bit/hertz/sector as a minimum value.
>
> I propose that we stick with the text in the original proposal for this
> paragraph:
>
> [Downlink > 2 bps/Hz/sector] @ 3km/hr
> [Uplink >1 bps/Hz/sector] @ 3km/hr
>
>
>
>
> John J. Humbert
> 6220 Sprint Parkway
> Mailstop KSOPHD0504 - 5D276
> Overland Park, KS 66251-6118
> PCS (816) 210-9611
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marianna Goldhammer [mailto:marianna.goldhammer@alvarion.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 6:19 AM
> To: Michael Youssefmir; Humbert, John J [NTWK SVCS];
> stds-80220-requirements@ieee.org
> Subject: RE: stds-80220-requirements: Section 4.1.2 Spectral Efficiency
>
> Mike,
>
> Both definitions are a mix of requirement / attempt to define
> conditions.
>
> If you look at evaluation methodology used in 3GPP/2, there are tenths
> of
> conditions influencing the spectral efficiency, still not addressing
> sector/beam number and frequency planning issue.
>
> I would propose to state in this document only the requirement. Should
> be done a study to see which are the most appropriate deployment
> architectures, for broadband data traffic, NOT limited by using the
> existing
> cellular infrastructure (see Dan's e-mails).
>
> And besides, the evaluation criteria should permit creative/advanced
> modes
> of improving spectral efficiency.
>
> Marianna
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Youssefmir [mailto:mike@arraycomm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 9:45 AM
> To: Humbert, John J [NTWK SVCS]; stds-80220-requirements@ieee.org
> Cc: Michael Youssefmir
> Subject: stds-80220-requirements: Section 4.1.2 Spectral Efficiency
>
>
>
>
> Folks,
>
> I was on tap for updating the text in this section
> to reflect the last requirements call. The general consensus on
> the call was to move forward with specifying a definition that
> would also lead to a baseline configuration for the evaluation
> group. (Please note previous recent text from Dan, Faroukh,
> and Samir on this section)
>
> Current text
>
> Sustained spectral efficiency is computed in a loaded multi-cellular
> network
> setting. It is defined as the ratio of the expected aggregate throughput
> (taking out all PHY/MAC overhead) to all users in an interior cell
> divided
> by the system bandwidth. The sustained spectral efficiency calculation
> shall assume that users are distributed uniformly throughout the
> network.
>
>
> [Downlink > 2 bps/Hz/sector]
> [Uplink >1 bps/Hz/sector]
>
> Proposed Text
>
> Sustained spectral efficiency is computed in a loaded multi-cellular
> network
> setting. It is defined as the ratio of the expected aggregate throughput
> (taking out all PHY/MAC overhead) to all users in a sector divided
> by the system bandwidth (the aggregate spectral allocation in use across
> the entire system). The sustained spectral efficiency calculation shall
> assume that users are distributed uniformly throughout the network
> and shall include a specification of the minimum expected data
> rate/user.
>
> A fair comparison of the spectral efficiencies of different air
> interfaces
> can best be achieved for a single specified baseline configuration. To
> facilitate the subsequent evaluation of different proposals for the
> 802.20
> air interface, the spectral efficiency of the 802.20 air interface shall
> be quoted as b/s/Hz/sector for a three sector baseline configuration.
> Within this subsequent evaluation, proposals may submit respective
> deployment models over and beyond the base configuration.
>
> Consistent with the PAR requirement that is stated on a per cell basis
> and
> the definitions shown in Appendix A, the sustained spectral efficiency
> of
> the 802.20 air interface shall be greater than 1 b/s/Hz/sector.
>
> Rationale
>
> This proposal captures the need for a baseline comparison methodology
> for ease of evaluating various proposals. By establishing a baseline
> three sectored configuration, we also finesse the subtleties in
> the per cell or per sector nature of the definition of spectral
> efficiency.
>
> [NOTE: The definition of "cell" in Appendix A states, "The term "cell"
> refers to one single-sector base station or to one sector of a base
> station deployed with multiple cells." As such, the PAR requirement of
> 1 bits/sec/Hz/cell is equivalent to 1 bits/sec/Hz/sector.
> The value established in the PAR and by the definition in the
> appendix through the definition: "Spectral efficiency: Spectral
> efficiency is measured in terms of bits/s/Hz/cell. (In the case
> of a sectorized configuration, spectral efficiency is given as
> bits/s/Hz/ sector.)"
>
> The current text in the Requirements document -- Version 8c
> has:
> downlink > 2 b/s/Hz/sector, and
> uplink > 1 b/s/Hz/sector
>
> While these values are proposed in the current document. I could
> not find any rationale for them on the list. The Requirements Group
> still needs to agree on target values for spectral efficiency.
> ]
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
>
> ************************************************************************
> ****
> ********
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
> computer
> viruses.
> ************************************************************************
> ****
> ********
> This mail was sent via mail.alvarion.com
>
> ************************************************************************
> ************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
> computer viruses.
> ************************************************************************
> ************