loading

LTEin400 PMR/PAMR impact on DTT systems above 470 MHz

RSS
[member was deleted] 31/03/17 17:22

This topic will contain posts related to LTEin400 PMR/PAMR impact on DTT systems above 470 MHz

[member was deleted] 31/03/17 17:31

Dear Petteri and colleagues,

 

Please find enclosed the propose merger of chapters 9 and 10 of Temp008. Please note that for chapter 10 we used the content from Temp007 which contains Ericsson's input and the EBU comments to it.

Our understanding is that this unique chapter (9) should replace chapters 8 and 9 of Temp008Rev1 as revised in the last plenary, before sending to WGSE.

 

The editorial notes highlighted in yellow indicate the source of each text following the Note. Eventually, these notes should be deleted before sending the document.

 

Concerning the track changes, they should not be considered as agreed as there has been no discussion on them during this SE7 meeting.

 

Best regards,

 

Walid

Mark Jordan 19/04/17 11:34

Dear Petteri and Colleagues,

Apologies for not attending the last meeting. I have read through Annex 9 and have many questions and comments some of which are in the attached file. I would like to have a better understanding of what has been modelled but I can't see the SEAMCAt files - are these available?

In terms of the contribution I am unclear what is concluded about the protection needed with respect to base stations. A lot of this has been previously covered in the 800 MHz LTE work and from that rollout we have practical experience of the issues.

With respect to the UE the study, unsurprisingly given the methodology used, concludes that the interference probability is very low. Concerns about the use of Monte Carlo studies for assessing interference from UE to DTT have been previously raised and the limitations of the method are mentioned in both CEPT and ITU documents. In assessing the results of these studies these limitations need to be recognised.

Regards

Mark

 

 

Martin Winbjörk 19/04/17 17:14

Dear colleagues

I think the merged studies posted above provides a good starting point for further discussions towards an integrated SE7 position on LTE-DTT compatibility.

Currently, however, the merged studies does not provide a clear and consistent description of LTE impact to DTT.
Hence, for the sake of readability, it’s better to send a draft report to the WGSE in which the annexes are contained as they are now and chapter 5 "LTE IMPACT ON DTT ABOVE 470 MHZ" summarizes the studies and conclusions so far.
A text proposal for a summary in chapter 5 is attached in this post.

In the current temp report in chapter 12 "Conclusion" there are some conclusions regarding LTE impact on DTT above 470 MHz. I suggest removing the conclusions in chapter 12 for the time being as the studies on LTE impact on DTT are still being discussed.

 

Br

Martin

Walid SAMI 19/04/17 22:56

Dear Martin and colleagues,

Thanks to Martin for this proposal,

We note however that the proposed text for chapter 5 is a compilation of the individual conclusions from each study in Annexs 9, 10 and 11. Some of these conclusions are in clear disagreement between them and further work is needed to reach agreed conclusions. Also, many EBU comments submitted during the discussions in the last meeting in Copenhagen in March (see SE7(17)Temp007) do not appear in the current Annexes or in the proposed text for chapter 5. 

We note also that Arqiva has formulated comments on Annex 9 in the forum. 

It is important that the submitted text to WGSE indicates clearly that "several issues regarding the content and the conclusions of Annexes 9, 10 and 11 are not solved and further work is needed to agree on conclusions". I suggest that the above statement be added under the title of chapter 5.

Best regards,

Walid



On 19/04/17 17:14 Martin Winbjörk wrote:
"

Dear colleagues

I think the merged studies posted above provides a good starting point for further discussions towards an integrated SE7 position on LTE-DTT compatibility.

Currently, however, the merged studies does not provide a clear and consistent description of LTE impact to DTT.
Hence, for the sake of readability, it’s better to send a draft report to the WGSE in which the annexes are contained as they are now and chapter 5 "LTE IMPACT ON DTT ABOVE 470 MHZ" summarizes the studies and conclusions so far.
A text proposal for a summary in chapter 5 is attached in this post.

In the current temp report in chapter 12 "Conclusion" there are some conclusions regarding LTE impact on DTT above 470 MHz. I suggest removing the conclusions in chapter 12 for the time being as the studies on LTE impact on DTT are still being discussed.

 

Br

Martin

".

[member was deleted] 20/04/17 12:42

Dear colleagues,

Thank you all for your valuable comments. In terms of the approach to consider, I would support the merged version proposed by Walid. It is true that many elements remain unclear and will need further contributions and discussions, and the conclusions of both BS and UE issues need to be refined. Given that the report will certainly not be submitted to public consultation, I believe it makes sense to have the merged version as a starting point, so that any refinement, comment on amendment is made on that basis, instead of having to consider each study separately in different annexes and merge them again at the end.

I wish we could save some time for the future, in particular given that lots of efforts have already been done by Walid to present different analyses under the same framework.

 

Regards,

Stephane MEBALEY

 

Martin Winbjörk 20/04/17 13:56

Dear colleagues

 

How about if we keep the merged studies as one single annex for DTT?  And we present a summary as the text earlier proposed by me with the additional comment proposed by Walid added as well for the text in chapter 5?

 

Br

Martin

Ari REFIK 20/04/17 14:00

Dear all,

 TDF supports the proposal from ANFR (Stéphane MEBALEY).

 It will be a shame to rule out the text proposed by Walid, which is the outcome of the discussions between EBU, ANFR, TDF and Ericsson during the last meeting and reflects perfectly the individual conclusions from each study in Annexes 9, 10 and 11. We believe that at this stage the text proposed by Walid is a necessary link to Annexes 9, 10 and 11. Consequently, it should be kept in the main body of the draft ECC Report

 Regards,

Ari REFIK (TDF)

 

 

Mark Jordan 20/04/17 14:43

Dear Colleagues

For the moment I would like add my voice to those supporting keeping the merged version proposed by the EBU. I also agree with ANFR that there are many elements that remain unclear and need further discussion before they can be agreed - so at this time I would expect WG SE to return the report to SE7 for further consideration.

Best regards

Mark Jordan (Arqiva)

[member was deleted] 21/04/17 10:16

Dear SE7 colleagues,

Triggered by the discussion above, I read the merged version of the EBU as well as Ericsson's contribution, and I must say I prefer the direction chosen by Ericsson.

First of all we should keep in mind that, although SE7 expressed a clear preference not to do so, the WGSE might decide to submit the draft report for public consultation. Also in my opinion that wouldn't be a wise decision and it's very unlikely indeed, but it's not up to us to decide that and hence we should deliver a report to WGSE that comes as close to a final draft as we can.

It is from that perspective that I would prefer to have in the main body of the report mainly summaries of the studies so far, where it's up to the readers to draw their own final conclusions, rather than a piece of text that provides a good structure for the future, but contentwise is inconsistent and unlogical. Please don't get me wrong: I consider the EBU contribution as a very valuable and helpful piece of work that will help us to make a good chapter on DTT once the WGSE decides to give SE7 more time, but for the current status I prefer a text like Ericsson's that is in itself consistent, logical and clear.

A second consideration is that in the last meeting we made the good choice to clean up the main body of the report and move all studies issued so far to the Annexes. From there we will build up the main text step by step and if we do that carefully and with much consideration, we will end up with a good report. So let's continue working in that mood and not place back large and unfinished texts before they are clear and consistent.

Best Regards,

Daan Beaufort