Re: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] Agenda for the 5/2 EPoC MMP Ad Hoc
Joe,
In either bit loading or MCS, is it assumed that a profile uses the same code word size ?
Hesham
From: Solomon, Joe [mailto:Joe_Solomon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 8:34 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] Agenda for the 5/2 EPoC MMP Ad Hoc
Colleagues,
Please find attached the working slides for the MMP Ad Hoc. The slides attempt to catalog the decisions that need to be made and document where we have come to consensus.
In tomorrow's meeting, we'd like to discuss and come to consensus on the wording of 5 straw polls, defining MMP. Once we settle on the wording, we can ask the Chair to post using the straw poll tool so that we can poll a larger group.
Here are the proposed straw polls:
1. The Modulation Coding Scheme (MCS) modulation profile is defined by the modulation QAM order and FEC Rate applied to the subcarrier. The same modulation profile is used on all subcarriers carrying a code word, based on average channel characteristics.
2. The TDD downstream will use multiple MCS modulation profiles.
3. The FDD downstream will use a single MCS modulation profile.
4. The Bit Loading modulation profile is defined by the modulation QAM order applied to the subcarrier. Modulation profiles are applied independently to each subcarrier or group of subcarriers based on channel characteristics.
5. The TDD and FDD upstream will use multiple bit loading modulation profiles.
We hope that these polls will help us come to a decision on the definition of modulation profiles and where they will be used.
Joe Solomon
Comcast - T & P Access Technology
303-242-7037
[cid:image001.png@01CDE9BB.95EA0330]
________________________________
<="" p="">
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
