doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Sounding and P Matrix Proposal
Date: 2010-05-16
Authors:
Name
Company
Address
Phone
email
Vinko Erceg
Broadcom
San Diego, CA
858 521 5885
[email protected]
Joseph Lauer
Broadcom
Carlos Aldana
Broadcom
67 South Bedford Street,
Suite 400 W
Burlington, MA 01803
Sunnyvale, CA
Hongyuan Zhang
Marvell
Raja Banerjea
Marvell
Eldad Perahia
Intel
Sameer Vermani
Qualcomm
Richard Van Nee
Qualcomm
Youhan Kim
Atheros
Youngsoo Kim
Samsung
Submission
Slide 1
[email protected]
[email protected]
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Introduction
•
•
•
•
Sounding Format
6x6 and 8x8 P matrices
P matrices for Nsts<=4
Straw polls
Submission
Slide 2
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Sounding Mechanism (1)
• In 11n, there are multiple sounding formats:
– Staggered sounding
– NDP sounding
• It would be desirable in TGac to converge onto a single
sounding format
– Compatibility and interoperability complications with multiple
formats
• Our proposal is to converge onto a single sounding
mechanism:
– NDP sounding frame format
Submission
Slide 3
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Sounding Mechanism (2)
• NDP sounding advantages
– Defines a cleaner and simpler immediate feedback protocol
• ACK is not required
– Less latency in providing CSI feedback when to compared to
staggered sounding
• No Data present
• May be important for MU feedback
– Channel staleness problem
– Only channel estimation for CSI feedback is performed after
receiving an NDP packet
• Potential parallel processing for data demodulation is avoided
– Works well with MU sounding mechanism
• Sounding for multiple users
Submission
Slide 4
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
P Matrix Definition (1)
• In TGac, new P matrices for Nsts > 4 need to be defined
• Proposal to define 6x6 DFT matrix P as follows
P6 x6
1
1

1

1
1

1
1
1
1
1
w1
w2
w3
w4
w2
w4
w6
w8
3
6
9
12
w
w
w
w
w4
w8
w12
w16
w5
w10
w15
w20
1 
w5 
w10 

w15 
w20 

w25 
Pm,n  exp(  j 2 (m  1)( n  1) / 6)
where w  exp(  j 2 / 6)
Submission
Slide 5
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
P Matrix Definition (2)
• Proposal to define 8x8 matrix P as follows:
 P4 x4
P
 4 x4
P4 x4 

 P4 x4 
where P4x4 is the 11n 4x4 P matrix
Submission
Slide 6
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
P Matrix Definition (3)
• We propose the same P matrix as in 11n, when Nsts<=4
in 11ac packets
• We propose not to include 5x5 and 7x7 P matrices in
the draft Tgac standard due to implementation
complexity reasons
Submission
Slide 7
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Polls
Submission
Slide 8
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #1
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.1.J: All VHT transmissions shall have a preamble which
contains a single section of long training fields, with each long
training field multiplied by entries belonging to a single P matrix,
to enable channel estimation at the receiver.
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 9
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #2
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.2.C: The draft specification shall include null data packet
(NDP) as the only preamble format for sounding PPDUs.
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 10
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #3
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.1.K: The single section of long training fields consists of one,
two, four, six or eight VHT long training fields (VHT-LTFs) that
are necessary for demodulation of the VHT-Data portion of the
PPDU or for channel estimation during an NDP packet.
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 11
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #4
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.1.K: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for one, two or four
VHT-LTFs shall be the same as defined in 802.11n standard
specification (Section 20.3.9.4.6, Eq. (20-27)).
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 12
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #5
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for six VHT-LTFs
shall be as defined in slide 4 of 11-10/00xxr0.
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 13
Vinko Erceg et al.
doc.:IEEE 802.11-10/0566r1
May 2010
Straw Poll #6
• Do you support adding the following item into the
specification framework document, 11-09/0992?
– R3.2.1.L: The VHT-LTF mapping matrix P for eight VHT-LTFs
shall be as defined in slide 5 of 11-10/00xxr0.
– Yes:
– No:
– Abs:
Submission
Slide 14
Vinko Erceg et al.