Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance.ppt

《Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Bob Heile, ZigBee Alliance.ppt（69页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、 SubmissionNovember 2008Myung Lee, CUNYSlide 1802.15 EC Agenda ItemsBob HeileNov. 14, 2008Submission802.15 EC Agenda ItemsStudy Group Renewals no supporting material 15.4f amendment-active tag RFID (32/0/0) 15.4g amendment-smartmeter utility networks (33/0/0) 15.7 visible light communications (30/0/

2、0)Drafts to RevCom Conditional approval to forward 802.15.4c Conditional approval to forward 802.15.5PARs to NesCom 15.4f amendment-active tag RFID 15.4g amendment-smart meter utility networks 15.7 visible light communications802.15.2 Reaffirmaton (28/0/0) no supporting materialSubmissionNovember 20

3、08Slide 3IEEE802.15.5 Recommended Practicefor WPAN Mesh NetworkingConditional Approval to Forward to RevComMyung LeeTG5 Chair, CUNYSubmissionNovember 2008Slide 4IEEE802.15.5 Recommended Practice WPAN Mesh1st Sponsor BallotBallot Result on d6P802-15-5_Draft_Standard.pdf Total Voters: 108 82 Voters re

4、turned (75%): 72 Affirmative, 1 Negative with two technical comments (from Eldad Perahia ) 9 abstention Approval Rate : 98% (72 out of 73 votes) Comments 27 Comments (2 technical, 25 editorial) All comments are resolvedSubmissionNovember 2008Myung Lee, CUNYSlide 5IEEE802.15.5 Recommended Practice Sp

5、onsor Ballot 1st Recirculation Recirculation package d7P802-15-5_Draft_Standard.pdf 15-08-0740-01-0005-TG5-Sponsor-ballot-comment-resolutions 802.15.5_SponsorBallotRecircCover Recirculation period: Nov. 7-Nov.22, 2008SubmissionNovember 2008Myung Lee, CUNYSlide 6Technical Comment for Low Rate Part fr

6、om Eldad Perahia Comment: The mesh network will be used to extend network coverage and by doing so complete changes the coverage paradigm. This is no longer a PAN technology and is now a LAN. This will greatly increase interference to other systems using the same bands. With the new coverage capabil

7、ities, interference into other systems and coexistence with other systems must be analyzed and addressed. Resolution (disagree): The mesh network does raise the interference level to some extend. However, being a low power, low data rate network, we believe LR-WPANs interference will not seriously a

8、ffect WiFi communications. We clearly stated the low power, low rate feature in Subclause 5.1. Other reasons include,1). 802.15.4-based LR WPAN mesh is built for sensor/control networks and have very light traffic in most applications, such as light switches, utility meters and thermostats. 2). Ther

9、e are four 15.4 channels (15, 20, 25, 26) that are not overlay with WiFi channels. By using the build-in automatic scanning mechanism, 15.4-based the networks can operate in different channels with WiFi. 3) 802.15.5 is not the first and the only mesh network standard based on 15.4. In fact, the ZigB

10、ee Alliance has done quite some research, including field test, on coexistence issues between WiFi and ZigBee. In fact, what people worry about is high-power WiFi will affect low-power ZigBee/15.4, not the other way around. 4) The coexistence problem has been addressed by 802.15.2.5) IEEE 802.15.4 s

11、upports peer-to-peer topology. A study must have been done before 15.4 became a standard.SubmissionNovember 2008Myung Lee, CUNYSlide 7Technical Comment for High Rate Part from Eldad Perahia Comment: The mesh network will be used to extend network coverage and by doing so complete changes the coverag

12、e paradigm. This is no longer a PAN technology and is now a LAN. This will greatly increase interference to other systems using the same bands. With the new coverage capabilities, interference into other systems and coexistence with other systems must be analyzed and addressed.Resolution (Disagree):

13、 Generally, interference and coexistence are critical factors in mesh networks. However, we believe that they will not generate serious problems due to the following reasons.1) Although IEEE802.15.3-based HR WPAN mesh extends to network coverage, the coverage is usually not that big. According to th

14、e technical requirements document for this draft, network size of HR WPAN mesh is at most 20 devices. Therefore HR WPAN mesh is still suitable for PAN, not for LAN.2) WPAN devices may not have a direct communication among participating devices in the network even in the small covered area. This happ

15、ens due to the attenuation by barriers like walls, doors, tables etc. The desirable mesh concept for HR WPAN is to remove such attenuation affecting on link performance, not simply to extend network coverage itself.3) Extending the coverage using the mesh architecture does not alter the characterist

16、ics of interference itself, but only increases the chances of encountering interference from other networks. Thus, we believe that the various methods described in the IEEE Std. 802.15.3-2003 Annex C are still effective to reduce the interference in the mesh environments. For example, if the HR-WPAN

17、 detects the presence of 802.11 WLAN, the PNC would choose a new channel that is not overlapped with the WLAN by adopting the coexistence channel plan. Provided that the 802.11 AP is equipped with additional functionalities as proposed by IEEE Std. 802.15.2-2003, the 802.11 WLAN may also share the s

18、uperframe structure of the HR-WPAN in the same channel by joining as a neighbor piconet. The HR-WPAN PHY has characteristics that make it easier to build dual-mode 802.11/802.15.3 radios. For more detailed descriptions, refer to the IEEE Std. 802.15.3-2003 Annex C.SubmissionIEEE802.15.5 Recommended

19、PracticeMotion to request conditional approval passed (69/1/1)Move that the EC grant conditional approval to forward 802.15.5 draft d8P802.15-5_Draft_Standard.pdf to RevCom Move: Bob Heile Second: Results:SubmissionNovember 2008Slide 9802.15.4c PHYAmendmentfor use of 780 MHz band in ChinaConditional

20、 Approval to Forward to RevComClint PowellTG4c Chair, FreescaleSubmission802.15.4c Sponsor Ballot Results Sponsor Ballot ResultsSponsor Ballot closed at 11:59 PM on Sat. Sept. 20 94 Total Voters in the Pool 68 Affirm Votes 4 Abstain Votes 3 Negative Votes w/ 22 Comments 95% affirmation Sponsor Ballo

21、t Recirc. #1 ResultsSponsor Ballot Recirc. #1 closed at 11:59 PM, Thurs. Nov. 6 94 Total Voters in the Pool 74 Affirm Votes 4 Abstain Votes 1 Negative Vote w/ 1 Comment 98% affirmationSubmission802.15.4c Sponsor Ballot Recirc. #1 1 CommentAnnex F is informative. These two paragraphs between lines 44

22、-29 should be moved Clause 6. Proposed ChangeMove two paragraphs to clause 6. A note is by definition informative, so either make this paragraph not a note or remove the shall. Alternatively, remove the shalls and leave the paragraphs in Annex F. Resolution StatusAgree Resolution DetailThe 3 instanc

23、es of “shall be“ will be replaced with “is“ and the 2 paragraphs will remain in Annex F.SubmissionMotion in 802.15 WG“That the 802.15 WG seeks conditional approval from the EC to submit the 801.15 TG4c Draft amendmentP802-15-4c-D06_Draft_Amendment to RevCom.”Motion Passed UnanimouslyResults: 31/0/0

24、Y/N/A SubmissionMotion for the ECMove that conditional approval be granted to forward P802-15-4c-D06_Draft_Amendment to RevComMoved: Bob HeileSecond:Results: Submission802.15.4f Draft PAR for a PHY Amendment to 15.4 to support RFIDPosted PAR reaffirmed by the WG (32/0/0)Submission802.15.4f Draft PAR

25、 to NesComMove that the 802 EC approve forwarding the 802.15.4f draft PAR for a PHY amendment to 802.15.4 (Doc# 15-08-0665-03) to NesComMove: Bob HeileSecond: Mat ShermanResultsSubmission802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11The 802.15.4 RFID PAR & 5C are incomplete and should not be

26、 approved because: The 5C & PAR incorrectly claim there is no existing international standard There are currently standards available for active tag technology, but none meet all the requirements identified in the PAR document. Action: Added to section 5.5 of the PAR documentThere is considerable de

27、mand for a globally available standard that includes, but is not limited to, the identified requirements: Ultra-low energy consumption (low duty cycle) Low PHY transmitter power Both one-way and two-way communications (simplex and duplex transmission) High tag density (large tag population of many t

28、housands) Reader to tag and tag to tag (meshing) communication (unicast) One to many communication (multicast) Authentication Sensor integration Accurate location determination capability 100m read range Global availability (with our without licensing) Narrow bandwidth PHY channels less than 3MHz wi

29、de Capable of avoiding, or operating in the presence of interference from other devices operating within the Active RFIDs frequency band of operationSubmission802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11The 802.15.4 RFID PAR & 5C are incomplete and should not be approved because: The 5C &

30、PAR need to include evidence that there is user demand for yet another RFID standard There are existing efforts in other standards organizations but none have the wherewithal to build an air interface protocol that 802.15.4 already addresses in a way that can meet the active RFID requirements. Addit

31、ionally, many of the other organizations specifically name IEEE 802.15.4 as viable and available globally to provide a standard air interface protocol for this purpose. Action: Response to commentsThere are multiple single-purpose standards in the market place today. Whats missing is a true, globall

32、y available multi-purpose standard. If a true global multi-purpose standard is developed, then it is highly likely that it would be used in all of the industries referred to in the 5C document, which in turn would mean a very large user base. Action: Added to 1b of the 5C documentSubmission802.15.4

33、RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11The 802.15.4 RFID PAR & 5C are incomplete and should not be approved because: The 5C & PAR need explain what technical deficiencies of existing systems the proposed standard will address Most active tags today in the market use a simplex (one-way) transmi

34、ssion scheme used for the sole purpose of determining location in order to reduce their energy consumption and have no congestion control mechanism for high density reads. Active RFID tags require the ability to provide bi-directional communications as well as ranging, and congestion control for hig

35、h density reads using ultra-low power.One active tag type mentioned in the 5C document, is not capable of bi-directional communication, nor ranging, nor multi-lateration in determining location is ISO/IEC 18000-7 (433 MHz). This tag type is used for identification but requires interrogation from a r

36、eader and does not transmit autonomously, uses a frequency not globally available, has no mechanism for congestion control, and has a limited read distance. Action: Added to section 4a of the 5C documentSubmission802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11The 802.15.4 RFID PAR & 5C are in

37、complete and should not be approved because: The 5C & PAR need to provide a better justification of technical feasibility for a unified standard that addresses the requirements of all market segmentsEconomies of scale in the active RFID markets are not being met due to a lack of a globally available

38、 standard. Today, numerous vendors are producing active tags that meet very specific (and proprietary/non-interoperable) requirements of customers but are doing so with proprietary solutions. An active RFID standard will set the baseline for continued growth but gain the value that economies of scal

39、e can bring to price and production levels. Action: Added to section 5.5 of the PARSubmission802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11The 802.15.4 RFID PAR & 5C are incomplete and should not be approved because: The 5C & PAR need to acknowledge the use of 802.11 in this space today and

40、explain why a 802.15.4 based solution will be significantly betterSome vendors have decided to adopt 802.11 for active location tags. This type of active tag is used exclusively for location determination and some (relatively little) sensing. The primary issue with using 802.11 for autonomous active

41、 RFID tags is the amount of energy required to power the tag and the short lifetime and short mean time between maintenance intervals to replace batteries. Autonomous RFID tags are required to run for 3-5 years without a battery change. This is not possible with 802.11. 802.11 continues to focus on

42、higher data rates than what is common with 802.15.4 and less on ultra-low energy consumption (a focus within 802.15.4). Furthermore, the volume of active RFID tags within a confined region using 802.11 will have a severe impact (high collision rate) on non-tag stations on the same WiFi network (ther

43、e are typically only three(3) non-overlapping channels) . The 802.15.4f PAR includes a PHY amendment to the 802.15.4 standard to include narrow bandwidth PHY channels less than 3MHz wide (to increase available channels) which would reside below, between, and above 802.11 channels to minimize the cha

44、nce of interference. Action: Added to 4b of the 5C documentSubmissionThe 802.15.4 RFID 5C & PAR incorrectly claim there is no existing international standard The 5C asserts that there is a need for an international standard for active RFID, and the PAR asserts that is there in no international stand

45、ard.Most active tags today in the market use a simplex (one-way) transmission scheme used for the sole purpose of determining location in order to reduce their energy consumption and have no congestion control mechanism for high density reads. Active RFID tags require the ability to provide bi-direc

46、tional communications as well as ranging, and congestion control for high density reads using ultra-low power. There are no international standards that meet this capability and moreover, EPCglobal has specifically identified 802.15.4 as one clear possible air interface protocol for active RFID tags

47、 that may meet active RFID tag requirements. Action: Added to section 5.5 of the PAR document802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11SubmissionThe 802.15.4 RFID 5C & PAR incorrectly claim there is no existing international standard However, the 5C indicates that an international standa

48、rd does exist, and even quotes the number of an ISO standard. One active tag type mentioned in the 5C document as an example, is not capable of bi-directional communication, nor ranging, nor multi-lateration in determining location, is ISO/IEC 18000-7 (433 MHz). This tag type is used for identificat

49、ion but requires interrogation from a reader, does not transmit autonomously, has no mechanism for congestion control, and has a limited read distance. Action: Response to comment802.15.4 RFID PAR and 5C Comments Received from 802.11SubmissionThe 802.15.4 RFID 5C & PAR incorrectly claim there is no existing international standard There are also other quasi international standards in this space that need to be acknowledged explicitly in the PAR. The 5C and PAR need to be modified t