Doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2 802-11 PAR Review March 2015 Date: 2015-03-08 March 2015 Jon Rosdahl, CSR Slide 1 Authors:

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

802-11 PAR Review March 2015• Date: 2015-03-08

March 2015

Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 1

Name Affiliations Address Phone email Jon Rosdahl CSR Technologies Inc 10871 N 5750 W

Highland, UT 84003 +1-801-492-4023 [email protected]

Authors:

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Abstract-Snapshot• Review of Proposed PAR documents

– 802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSD – 802.1Qci- Amendment, Per-Stream Filtering and Policing, PAR and CSD – 802.1Qcj- Amendment, Automatic Attachment to Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB)

services, PAR and CSD – 802.3bq- Amendment, PAR Modification Request and CSD – 802.3bz- Amendment, 2.5 Gb/s and 5 Gb/s, PAR and CSD – 802.11ay- Amendment: Enhancements for Ultra High Throughput in and around the

60 GHz Band, PAR and CSD – 802.15.3e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point

communications , PAR and CSD – Privacy Recommendation EC Study Group - Privacy Considerations for IEEE 802

Technologies, PAR and CSD – 802.24 IoT New TG request

• Meeting times: Monday PM2, Tuesday AM2, Thursday AM2

March 2015

Jon Rosdahl, CSRSlide 2

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

PAR SC – November 2014Chair: Jon Rosdahl

•Monday Agenda:1. Welcome2. Determine order of review3. Review PARs/CSD posted for review this week.4. Recess

•Tuesday Agenda:1. Complete review of PARs/CSD and post comments to 802 WGs2. Recess

•Thursday Agenda:1. Review Response to Comments2. Prepare Report for 802.11 WG closing plenary3. Adjourn

March 2015

Slide 3

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSD

• 2.1 Expand Acronym “MAC” – “Media Access Control (MAC)”

• 5.2b Change “local address space” to “local MAC address space”

• 5.4 – Change “unique addresses” to “unique MAC addresses” –

• Change “local address” to “local MAC address”- 3 places.

March 2015

Slide 4

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR (cont)

• 5.4 – Problem statement not clearly defined in the need statement. “While we agree that the number of IoT devices may use more of the Local MAC Address space, please explain in the need section why the Local MAC Address space requires the simultaneous use of Multiple Local MAC Address Administrators.”

• 6.1b – CID is not defined and is only used once…just spell it out “Company Identifier ”

• 5.2b and 6.1b – “Company ID” – Should be “Company Identifier” (2 instances)

March 2015

Slide 5

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c- Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, CSD

• Compatibility – Just say “Yes”, delete the rest.• Distinct Identity – Suggested change: “There are no

guidelines for using the Local MAC Address space in existing standards.”

• Technical Feasibility – Check the cited standard (possibly incorrect citation format) and include the full name of standard inline or as a note.

• Economic Feasibility – change “...local address distribution or claiming…” to “…local MAC Address distribution or claiming…”

March 2015

Slide 6

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.1Qci- Amendment, Per-Stream Filtering and Policing, PAR and CSD

• No Comment

March 2015

Slide 7

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.1Qcj- Amendment, Automatic Attachment to Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) services, PAR and CSD

• 5.2 Scope – First use of LAN/VLAN/MAC should have been spelled out…WG may consider for revision project, we understand that it was missed when the base standard PAR was approved.

• 5.2b Change “TLVs” to “TLV”• 5.4 expand LAN if not changing scope

statement.

March 2015

Slide 8

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.3bq- Amendment, PAR Modification Request and CSD

• No Comment

March 2015

Slide 9

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.3bz- Amendment, 2.5 Gb/s and 5 Gb/s, PAR and CSD

• No comment

March 2015

Slide 10

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.11ay- Amendment: Enhancements for Ultra High Throughput in and around the 60 GHz Band, PAR and CSD

• Other 802 WGs will Provide feedback to 802.11ay for response.

March 2015

Slide 11

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.15.3e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point communications , PAR and CSD

• 5.2a – “high rate” – What is high rate? –consider changing to “high rate (up to 100Gbps)”

• “Data rates are high enough” Not defined enough for a scope statement.

• 5.4 – “High” and “Low” are relative terms that should be defined as what is “High” or “Low” reword without “high” or “low”

• “Wireless switched point-to-point” – what is this? Does “switched” relate to a packet or connection type switch?

• Should intra-device really be inter-device?• Wireless backhaul/fronthaul? – what is meant by this?

March 2015

Slide 12

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.15.3e- Amendment for High-rate close proximity point-to-point communications , PAR and CSD

• 7.1 Similar Scope – 802.11ad and 802.11ay are similar. Please note similarities and differences.

• CSD:• Broad sets of applicability: “high rate” –nebulous – give range to define

what is “high rate”• Multiple vendors: Please answer the question about the market

potential not the attendees affiliations.• 1.2.4 don’t list the corporations in the CSD, but do cite reference to the

evidence alluded to.• 1.2.5c) do not use “Wi-Fi” change to “WLAN” or delete

March 2015

Slide 13

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Privacy Recommendation EC Study Group - Privacy Considerations for IEEE 802 Technologies, PAR and CSD

• 4.2 and 4.3 need to include target dates for completion. Should be at least 6 months apart.

• 5.2 Change “document” to “recommended practice”• 5.4 delete “document” result “The recommended practice…”• 5.5 change “and certain threats” to “and certain privacy threats”• 5.5 change “with IETF in many” to “with IETF on many”• 5.5 change “guidelines” to “recommendations”• CSD:• Distinct Identity: change “defines privacy” to “defines a privacy” and

“practice” to “practices”• Economic Feasibility – Question was not answered need to provide

evidence and address the requested specific areas “a) through e)”.

March 2015

Slide 14

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

• IEEE 802.24 approved a scope document for a new IEEE 802.24 TAG Task Group focused on Internet of things (IoT) vertical applications.

The document was approved 7/0/0 by IEEE 802.24 and can be found at:https://mentor.ieee.org/802.24/dcn/15/24-15-0003-00-0000-iot-scope-form.docx

I expect to bring this for approval during the Friday closing meeting during the March plenary.

According to the procedure adopted by the IEEE 802 EC, such documents need to be circulated 30 days in advance of the plenary meeting.

Comments from WGs are due by 6:30 pm local time on Tuesday during the plenary meeting.

Responses from IEEE 802.24 are due by 6:30 pm local time on Wednesday during the plenary meeting.

Members of IEEE 802.24 will be seeking votes of support from IEEE 802 WGs during the week. I will advise the appropriate WG Chairs when such a motion will be requested.

March 2015

Slide 15

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.24 IoT New TG request feedback

1. Scope – missing “.” at end of Scope.2. Customer – ‘Customer’ is what is being asked to be identified…

please identify “who the customer” is to answer the question.3. Similar Groups – What are the “in identified IoT vertical

applications”? What are the liaison opportunities? Would a liaison with “IEEE P2413” be one of those opportunities? What about any opportunities with those groups identified in #4?

March 2015

Slide 16

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Motion to Send Feedback to 802 WGs

• Move to send feedback prepared by PAR Review SC to the respective IEEE 802 WGs as documented in 11-14/0229r1.

• Moved: Dan Harkins• 2nd: Michelle Turner• Results: 8-0-0 motion passes.

March 2015

Slide 17

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses from 802 WGs

March 2015

Slide 18

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Privacy EC SG Comment Responses• Dear 802 EC members,• The Privacy EC SG has received several comments on the PAR/CSD. We

appreciate the feedback received. Comments have been captured in the following file:

• https://mentor.ieee.org/privecsg/dcn/15/privecsg-15-0010-01-ecsg-par-csd-comments-received.pptx

• The group believes that some comments require further and more detailed consideration. Therefore, I have been appointed by the group to request to the EC withdrawing the Privacy EC SG PAR proposal from the March 13th Agenda.

• Comment responses will still be provided by March 12th. • Best regards,• Juan Carlos (Privacy EC SG Chair - http://www.ieee802.org/PrivRecsg/)

March 2015

Slide 19

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Privacy EC SG: Response to Comments from 802.11• 4.2 and 4.3 need to include target dates for completion. Should be at least 6

months apart.– See previous response to Roger Mark’s comment

• 5.2 Change “document” to “recommended practice”• 5.4 delete “document” result “The recommended practice…”• 5.5 change “and certain threats” to “and certain privacy threats”• 5.5 change “with IETF in many” to “with IETF on many”• 5.5 change “guidelines” to “recommendations”

– Agree with the above

• CSD:• Distinct Identity: change “defines privacy” to “defines a privacy” and

“practice” to “practices”• Economic Feasibility – Question was not answered need to provide evidence

and address the requested specific areas “a) through e)”.– See previous response to Roger Mark’s comment. We will address this in a future version of

the CSD

March 2015

Slide 20

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Privacy EC SG: Comments from Roger Marks• CSD Economical Feasibility• The response does not address economic feasibility.• Increased privacy has economic benefits to some parties

and is an economic threat to others. These issues should be articulated. – Should probably state that Privacy control should enhance, not

degrade, security and functionality. Please see: https://mentor.ieee.org/omniran/dcn/15/omniran-15-0015-00-CF00-privacy-engineered-access-network.pptx

– (Consider adding a clear statement like the one used in IETF)– There are examples of solutions that improve privacy without

increasing significantly the cost (e.g. MAC address randomization)

March 2015

Slide 21

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.24 IoT New TG response to comments• IEEE 802.24 TAG has created a response to the comments received regarding

the scope document for the formation an IEEE 802.24 TAG Task Group on IoT.

The responses can be found at:https://mentor.ieee.org/802.24/dcn/15/24-15-0010-00-IoTg-response-to-scope-comments.pdf

Changes were made to the scope document in response to the comments and the updated document can be found at:https://mentor.ieee.org/802.24/dcn/15/24-15-0003-01-0000-iot-scope-form.docx

Thanks

James GilbIEEE 802.24 TAG Chair

March 2015

Slide 22

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802.15.3e Response to Comments– a word doc containing responses to the comments received from

802.3 and 802.11 on the 15.3e PAR and CSD. Also attached is a revised CSD including the proposed changes. Final changes to the PAR must be done by the NesCom Admin so a revised PAR is not attached but the suggested changes are included in the comment responses. Please let me know if you have any further comments or questions.

– https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/15/15-15-0229-03-003e-par-csd-comments-resolutions.docx

– https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/14/15-14-0716-07-003e-sg3e-draft-csd.docx

RegardsBobBob Heile, Ph.DChair, IEEE 802.15 Working Group on Wireless Personal Area Networks

March 2015

Slide 23

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

5.2.a. Scope of the complete standard: This standard defines PHY and MAC specifications for high data rate wireless connectivity with fixed, portable and moving devices. Data rates are high enough to satisfy a set of consumer multimedia industry needs, as well as to support emerging wireless switched point-to-point and high rate close proximity applications.

Action: Modify the scope of the 802.15.3 standard to the following. We did not elect to use the suggested resolution since 1 bps would qualify as high rate with that wording.

Also a reminder that this is the revised scope for the base standard not this project hence the lower number.

This standard defines PHY and MAC specifications for high data rate wireless connectivity (typically over 200 Mbps) with fixed, portable and moving devices. Data rates are high enough to satisfy a set of consumer multimedia industry needs such as streaming HD video, as well as to support emerging wireless switched point-to-point and high rate close proximity applications.

March 2015

Slide 24

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

5.4 – “High” and “Low” are relative terms that should be defined as what is “High” or “Low” reword without “high” or “low”

“Wireless switched point-to-point” – what is this? Does “switched” relate to a packet or connection type switch?

Should intra-device really be inter-device?

Wireless backhaul/fronthaul? – what is meant by this?

5.4 Purpose: The purpose of this standard is to provide for low complexity, low cost, low power consumption, high data rate wireless connectivity among devices supporting a variety of applications including things like a set of consumer multimedia industry needs, wireless switched point-to-point applications in data centers, wireless backhaul/fronthaul intra-device communications and a wide variety of additional use cases such as rapid large multimedia data downloads and file exchanges between two devices in close proximity, including between mobile devices and stationary devices (kiosks, ticket gates, etc.), and/or wireless data storage devices.

Action: Disagree. This language has already been approved by NesCom as part of 802.15.3 base standard revised purpose included in the 802.15.3d PAR.

Note: The use of the term “intra-device” is correct.

March 2015

Slide 25

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

7.1 Similar Scope – 802.11ad and 802.11ay are similar. Please note similarities and differences.

7.1 Are there other standards or projects with a similar scope?: No

802.15.3 and 802.15.3c preceded 802.11ad and 802.11ay. 802.15.3e merely builds on 802.15.3 and 802.15.3c to support new applications in the 802.15.3 family. 802.11ay was not available while this PAR was being drafted.

March 2015

Slide 26

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

CSD:

Broad sets of applicability: “high rate” –nebulous – give range to define what is “high rate”

a) Broad sets of applicability.

There is a need for close proximity high rate communications to service the transmission and rapid exchange of large data files based on close proximity, point-to-point connections, potentially to large numbers of mobile devices in the same space. This amendment consists of IEEE 802.15.3 MAC additions and an unlicensed 60GHz Physical layer, delivering date rates up to 100Gbps, for use in a wide variety of use cases such as rapid large multimedia data downloads and file exchanges between two close proximity devices, i.e. mobile devices, stationary devices (kiosks, ticket gates, etc.), and other wirelessly enabled data storage devices.

Action: Revise CSD 1.2.1a to read as follows:

There is a need for close proximity high rate communications to service the transmission and rapid exchange (subseconds) of large data files (on the order of 25 Gbits) based on close proximity, point-to-point connections, potentially to large numbers of mobile devices in the same space. This amendment consists of IEEE 802.15.3 MAC additions and an unlicensed 60GHz Physical layer, delivering date rates up to 100Gbps, for use in a wide variety of use cases such as rapid large multimedia data downloads and file exchanges between two close proximity devices, i.e. mobile devices, stationary devices (kiosks, ticket gates, etc.), and other wirelessly enabled data storage devices.

March 2015

Slide 27

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

CSD:

Multiple vendors: Please answer the question about the market potential not the attendees affiliations.

b) Multiple vendors and numerous users.There have been 20-30 people, affiliated with 10 or so companies, participating in the development of this project and actively showing interest. Participants include international wireless carriers/service providers, academic researchers, government research laboratories, semiconductor manufacturers, communication equipment manufacturers, system integrators and end users.

Action: Revise CSD 1.2.1b to read as follows.

There are a large number of multimedia companies who are expected to serve this application space. The application is aimed at a broad consumer market which is comprised of a large number of users. Participants in the standard include chip vendors, chip designers, technology suppliers, radio frequency (RF) equipment manufacturers, infrastructure providers, international wireless carriers/service providers, academic researchers, government research laboratories, semiconductor manufacturers, communication equipment manufacturers, system integrators and consumers.

March 2015

Slide 28

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

1.2.4 don’t list the corporations in the CSD, but do cite reference to the evidence alluded to.

1.2.4 Technical FeasibilityEach proposed IEEE 802 LMSC standard shall provide evidence that the project is technically feasible within the time frame of the project. At a minimum, address the following items to demonstrate technical feasibility:a) Demonstrated system feasibility.

The sequence of link setup, data transfer and link release occurring within a short duration has already been demonstrated for point-to-point wireless communication systems by Sony, Toshiba and others.

b) Proven similar technology via testing, modeling, simulation, etc.

Similar main components of the technology and signaling are being used in today’s systems by Sony, Toshiba and others. Hence, the involved testing overhead associated with a commercial development undertaken by manufacturers is known to be reasonable.

Action: Revise CSD 1.2.4a and b to read as follows.

a) Demonstrated system feasibility.

The sequence of link setup, data transfer and link release occurring within a short duration has already been demonstrated for point-to-point wireless communication systems by a number of multimedia organizations and universities such as TU Braunschweig.

b) Proven similar technology via testing, modeling, simulation, etc.

Similar main components of the technology and signaling are being used today in proprietary commercial systems and in research laboratories at University institutions such as TU Braunschweig.

March 2015

Slide 29

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Responses to IEEE 802.11 comments on the 802.15.3e PAR and CSD

1.2.5c) do not use “Wi-Fi” change to “WLAN” or delete

c) Consideration of installation costs.The installation of fixed standalone terminals would be similar to that of installing Wi-Fi access points and when included in devices like ticket gates would not add to the installation cost of that gate

Action: Accept. Change “Wi-Fi” to “WLAN”

March 2015

Slide 30

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

P802.1Qci Updated PAR/CSD

• The updated P802.1Qci PAR can be found at:• http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2

015/new-nfinn-input-gates-par-0115-v05.pdf

• • The updated CSD can be found at:

http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2015/new-nfinn-input-gates-csd-0115-v03.pdf

March 2015

Slide 31

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

The 802.1 Local Address SG met to resolve the comments on the 802c PAR and CSD.

• The 802.1 Local Address SG met to resolve the comments on the 802c PAR and CSD.

• The updated PAR is:– http://ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2015/new-addresses-thaler-local-address-par-v02

.pdf

• The updated CSD is:– http://ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2015/lasg-mjt-802c-CSD-0315-v02.pdf

• The consolidated comments received from 802.3, 802.11, Paul Nikolich and Roger Marks , along with resolutions are here:– http://ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2015/lasg-haddock-consolidated-par-csd-commen

ts-0315-v1.pdf

• Cheers,• Glenn Parsons - Chair, IEEE 802.1

March 2015

Slide 32

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c - Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSD

• 2.1 Expand Acronym “MAC” – “Media Access Control (MAC)”

• 5.2b Change “local address space” to “local MAC address space”

• 5.4 – Change “unique addresses” to “unique MAC addresses”

• Change “local address” to “local MAC address” - 3 places.

• –Agree with all except it is Medium Access Control

March 2015

Slide 33

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c - Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSD

• 5.4 – Problem statement not clearly defined in the need statement. “ While we agree that the number of IoT devices may use more of the Local MAC Address space, please explain in the need section why the Local MAC Address space requires the simultaneous use of Multiple Local MAC Address Administrators.”

–Accept (but need is 5.5), see following slide•6.1b –CID is not defined and is only used once...just spell it out “Company Identifier ”

– Accept• 5.2b and 6.1b – “Company ID” – Should be “Company • Identifier” (2 instances)

– Accept

March 2015

Slide 34

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c updated 5.5 Need

• Currently, globally unique MAC addresses are assigned to most IEEE 802 end stations and bridge ports. Increasing use of virtual machines and Internet of Things (IoT) devices could exhaust the global MAC address space if global MAC addresses are assigned. These applications could use local MAC address space, but in that case some applications require independent address administration (e.g. virtualization systems and protocol specific address mappings). This project will provide conventions and enable protocols that will allow multiple stations or servers to automatically configure and use local MAC addresses without conflict when multiple administrations share a local address space. Such protocols will allow virtual machines and IoT devices to obtain a local MAC address without centralized local MAC address administration

March 2015

Slide 35

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

802c - Amendment: Local Media Access Control (MAC) Addressing, PAR and CSD

Compatibility – Just say “Yes”, delete the rest. –accept

• Distinct Identity – Suggested change: “There are no guidelines for using the Local MAC Address space in existing standards.”

–Accept • Technical Feasibility – Check the cited standard (possibly incorrect citation format) and include the full name of standard inline or as a note.

–Accept • Economic Feasibility – change “...local address distribution or claiming…” to “…local MAC Address distribution or claiming…”

–Accept

March 2015

Slide 36

doc.: IEEE 802-11-15/0229r2

Jon Rosdahl, CSR

Minutes for PAR Review SC•Monday PM2:

1. Welcome – called to order at 4pm by Jon Rosdahl2. Determine order of review - 3. Review PARs/CSD posted for review this week.4. Recess at 6pm

•Tuesday AM1:1. Called to order at 10:30am2. Completed review of PARs/CSD and post comments to 802 WGs3. Recess

•Thursday Agenda:–Meeting did not come to order as there was only the Chair attending.1. Review Response to Comments2. Prepare Report for 802.11 WG closing plenary3. Adjourn

March 2015

Slide 37