5G Inter-Band DL CA Feature Status Update from 3GPP Meeting #96-e
Get the latest updates on the 5G Inter-Band Downlink Carrier Aggregation (DL CA) feature status discussed at the 3GPP Meeting #96-e in August 2020, including capabilities needed, slow convergence issues, and options for progress in the development of this key feature.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 Meeting #96-e Online Meeting, Aug 2020 Agenda: 7.1.12.5 R4-201xxxx FR2 Rel FR2 Rel- -16 inter 16 inter- -band DL CA feature band DL CA feature Status as of 16 Aug 2020 Status as of 16 Aug 2020 Moderator (Qualcomm Incorporated)
Background of Rel-16 feature FR2 Inter-band CA limited to 2 DL, 1 UL configuration by common understanding WID contains following directive (RP-200668): FR2 UE requirements for inter-band DL CA [RAN4] FR2 inter-band combinations requested: WID on NR Inter-band CA/DC for 2 DL, x UL (x=1,2) (RP-200672) lists one family: CA_n260x-n261y Goal: Complete feature requirements by end of 96-e Requirements discussion stalled due to no convergence on envelope of feature Which capabilities are necessary to be defined? Which can be left as avenues for enhancement in a future release?
Capability discussions [1] that have slowed RAN4 convergence Capability (all are per band-pair) Description Notes Beam management assumption IBM each band can support independent AoAs CBM UE can support inter-CA only if both bands can ride a common UE Rx beam Discussion has highlighted that requirements or side-conditions may be unique to each kind, for example PSD and MRTD Common spherical coverage Declaration of inability to support co- located inter-band deployments Requirements discussion has not started. Testability concerns raised also. MRTD There is no convergence on whether MRTD is independent of CBM/IBM. Also TBD relation with common spherical coverage capability New frequency-sep class signaling for CBM Implies introduction of a partial inter-band capability (new) that allows UE to not cover both bands fully No consensus on notion of partial inter- band coverage
Options for progress in 96-e Option 1 Option2 Focus requirement on requested combinations. No new capabilities introduced for Rel-16 Create a broader, generalized requirement. Requires consensus on capability set first Main aspects for discussion Beam management, per band pair IBM is default capability for requested combos (n260+n261) - New band combos can be added as release independent from 16 - CBM capability can be added in a future release Introduce IBM and CBM capabilities, along with separate requirement sets Common sph. coverage, per band pair Mandatory to support co-located deployments Introduce capability, interdependency rules, separate requirements MRTD, per band pair Per TS38.133 Introduce capability, interdependency rules, separate requirements New Inter-band signaling and capability for CBM band pair N/A Introduce capability, interdependency rules, separate requirements CR available for 96-e? R4-2010538 No
Way Forward on Rel-16 FR2 Inter-band DL CA feature Focus on making CR R4-2010538 agreeable at this meeting FFS whether to introduce IBM and CBM capabilities in R16
References [1] R4-2008953 Email discussion summary for [95e][123] NR_RF_FR2_req_enh_Part_3 Moderator(Qualcomm)
