Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index


I vote "Yes" on this ballot.

			Bill Lidinsky

Jim Carlo wrote:
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> SEC OFFICIAL EMAIL BALLOT     802.0/28Sept1999
> Issue Date:   28Sept1999        Closing Date: 1October1999
> Moved By:     Vic Hayes
> Seconded By:  Bob Heile
> Move: Authorize responding from IEEE 802 to the FCC NPRM (Docket No. 99-231)
> with doc.: 11-99/210-r4 (in principal). Approved by 802.11 EMAIL ballot:
> 69-Yes, 2-No, 3-Abstain.
> This letter states that  "The Committee supports the CW jammer test,
> together with the additional requirement for mathematical justification for
> systems utilizing codes with less than 10 chips as proposed in paragraph 15
> and advises the Commission of our concerns regarding an alternative Gaussian
> noise test as proposed in paragraph 14. Members of the Committee have
> performed extensive analysis and technical trade-off studies that were
> discussed at the IEEE 802.11 Interim Meeeting (Santa Rosa, 13-17 September
> 1999) to ensure that its 2.4 GHz high data rate waveform adheres to the
> processing Gain requirement of at least 10dB.2 As a result of these
> studies, it has concluded that the processing Gain test using the CW jamming
> test as proposed in paragraph 15 of the Notice is a valid method to confirm
> the processing gain requirement.
> Approval is requested for this letter (in principal) to allow for editing by
> Vic Hayes, Bob Heile and Jim Carlo based on various comments (including IEEE
> staff) being provided. The letter needs to be submitted to the FCC by
> 4October.
> If you want to see the document 99/209 in its entirety, please go to the web
> at:
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                           Name: 9210r48a.pdf
>    9210r48a.pdf           Type: Acrobat (application/pdf)
>                       Encoding: base64
>                Download Status: Not downloaded with message