Dear Coexistence CG participants,
In its July meeting, 802.20 WG chose to form a Coexistence
Correspondence Group to "study and create a consensus recommendation on how to
address the issues of coexistence of future 802.20 systems with other wireless
technologies deployed in the licensed bands below 3.5 GHz."
There were two contributions on the issue of coexistence
presented to the WG.
-
C802.20-03/72, by Reza Arefi
-
C802.20-03/61r1, by Jim Tomcik, Ayman Naguib, and Arak Sutivong
The above two contributions, while consistent on acknowledging
the challenges of the task, presented different views on how to address the
issue within 802.20. While document 72 asked for a Coexistence Task Group
within 802.20 to deal exclusively with the issue in parallel to the air
interface work, document 61r1 suggested that the matter should be studied by
the entire body in series prior to the air interface work.
The goal of the CG is to come up with a recommendation on the
best way to address coexistence within the WG. The coexistence analyses
themselves are outside the scope of the CG and are left to a Coexistence
document that 802.20 is likely to produce. Therefore, I see the output of this
CG as a concise document (probably one page) that includes a clear
recommendation to the WG and the rationale behind that recommendation.
The way I propose to go forward is to have open discussions on
the reflector for a while so that we get a sense of the range of opinions and
the amount of interest in the subject. I will submit to the group a
compilation of all views prior to our first conference call on August 15. I
propose the following four specific topics for discussion on the reflector so
that we stay focused on what we are chartered to do. Please feel free to
choose from the list or suggest other related topics I might have
missed.
- Given the fact that 802.20 will be
deployed in licensed bands, does 802.20 WG need to address coexistence or
should the matter be left to the regulatory regime in each country?
- In case the WG chooses to take up the
task, should it create a "Recommended Practice" (one containing the word
"should") or a "Guideline" (one containing the word "may")?
- What are coexistence related issues
that need to be resolved before the work on the air interface could begin?
- Should the coexistence work focus on
the coexistence of 802.20 TDD and FDD variants as the primary source of
interference problems? Or should it focus on coexistence with other systems?
Looking forward to your participation.
Regards,
Reza