| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Junyi,
The text you have asked clarification on comes from the IEEE 802.20
PAR document and was authored by members of the MBWA study group that
preceded the 802.20 project. Thus, it would be appropriate to also
ask the authors to clarify the term
"existing infrastructure". My understanding is somewhat influenced by my
extensive background that includes cellular systems deployment planning, site
acquisition and operations management and thus, the term "existing infrastructure" for me
means a substantial part of cell sites' equipment, including the site itself,
the antenna tower/structure, the supporting general equipment, the interfaces to
the PSTN/PDN etc. Clearly, the
authors of the PAR wanted to paint an attractive prospect of a new wireless
technology that could swap out existing wireless technologies at minimal capital
investment, reusing existing cell site
infrastructure and radio operation licenses. I view this PAR text as
an important requirement that has to be translated to RF performance
characteristics such that when an 802.20 based system is deployed in an existing cell site, its specified performance
would be guaranteed in the entire cell's coverage area. Obviously, there
are several related key specification parameters that need to be explicitly
defined in the 802.20 SRD so that we meet this requirement. In
the absence of such specifications, the evaluation criteria document (ECD)
must specify target cell sizes in conjunction with channel and
propagation profiles for which contending proposals should show how and at
what performance level(s) they would operate in these
specified cells. An opened-ended approach where nothing of that sort is
specified is highly
inadequate.
Regards,
Dan
|