Clarification on features on handsets in Europe

[johannmika]

Problem description

Its unclear which (sub)set of 5G Broadcast specification will be supported on mobile devices.

Suggested solution

It would be good to have an Appendix clarifying the requirements (a profile) for European handset introduction.

[johannmika]

On behalf of the European 5G Broadcast handset taskforce and its members RAI, FranceTV, Media Broadcast, TDF, EITowers and ORS please find here the proposed 5G Broadcast receiver profile for Europe for inclusion in the next ETSI update:

CR 5G Broadcast receiver profile for Europe.docx

[haudiobe]

There was a submission by Frank Copsidas (XGEN) to ETSI on this matter as follows: "Respect the original proposal for the entire band 108 in TS 103 720, 470 MHz-698 MHz, not just the 606 MHz-698 MHz as requested in the change by 1.Y.Z. The handset profile submitted should be for the entIre band 108."

BROADCAST(24)000031_US_Handset_Profile_for_5G_Broadcast.docx

I propose to discuss this here.

[rjb1000]

On behalf of the European 5G Broadcast handset taskforce and its members RAI, FranceTV, Media Broadcast, TDF, EITowers and ORS please find here the proposed 5G Broadcast receiver profile for Europe for inclusion in the next ETSI update:

CR 5G Broadcast receiver profile for Europe.docx

Shouldn't this be uploaded to Causeway and given a formal internal document number, @johannmika?

[rjb1000]

Does this profile really only apply to Europe? If so, a formal definition of "Europe" in this context is needed. What are the boundaries of the region to which it applies?

Or does it apply throughout ITU Region 1? If so, the clause heading should reflect that instead, and a formal definition is not required since it is already well defined elsewhere.

[rjb1000]

Small editorial comment: clause headings in ETSI TS 103 720 use sentence case throughout rather than title case, so this CR should follow suit.

[rjb1000]

Something has gone wrong with the ETSI styles when copying and pasting the content into the CR form, so the editor should beware of messing up the master document when adopting the content.

[rjb1000]

Other editorial issues:

1. Citations:
   • All specifications referenced from the text proposal should be suffixed with the relevant reference number from clause 2, surrounded by square brackets.
   • Insert "TS" before each specification number cited.
   • Never specify a particular version of the TS in the normative text. This should be done only in clause 2, and then only if absolutely necessary as "Release 18", which means "the latest published V18.y.z".
     • The text proposal should propose changes to clause 2 as required to bring the references up to Release 18.
2. Clause headings with style "Heading 4" should be numbered explicitly.
3. Bulleted lists should use style B1 with the bullets entered manually with a hyphen followed by a tab.
4. Table caption should use style TH.
5. Table column headings should use style TAH.
6. Ordinary table data cells should use style TAL (left aligned), TAC (centre aligned) or TAR (right aligned).
7. There should be no blank lines anywhere in the normative text proposal except for one blank line after a table.
   • (The ETSI styles are designed not to require blank lines.)

[johannmika]

Hi @rjb1000, thank you for your help with the formal requirements, which I greatly appreciate.

From my understanding and if we follow the 5G MAG process, this topic is currently in the pre-acceptance phase (without formal requirements and open for public comments). I would suggest to formally upload it with an internal number and bring it to the ETSI style once we are moving to the “Change contribution drafting” phase (after further comments and the internal “Discussion for adoption” in the 5G-MAG).

[haudiobe]

Call on Sep 26, 2024:

• @johannmika presents CR 5G Broadcast receiver profile for Europe.docx

Discussion:

• @haudiobe
  • We should not define profiles for regions. We define a profile, and a region can refer to the profile. The profile will get a name. And there will be requirements within the profile
  • If we define second profile we can make the requirements of the first profiles included and extend. This is primarily editorial.
  • The profile should refer to clauses in the main TS 103 720 clauses. If this is not sufficient, we should update the main spec to be clearer.
  • there are requirements that are outside of 3GPP. this does not mean that we exclude them, but we need to editorially improve and then potentially reference to options outside 3GPP.
• Roland: Interesting - support. What receiver requirements are complex?
• Burdinat: see comments from @haudiobe

Disposition:

• we adopt the issue - we have at least one profile that addresses the initial deployment needs.
• On the document, we will work on editorial improvements based on the comments in the issue and discussion
• @johannmika upload a formal "draft CR" as a 5G-MAG doc
• @johannmika takes lead to progress the work, please raise to Johann if you want to be included
• We expect to publish a stable version for review outside 5G-MAG membership prior to moving it to stable draft, e.g. in December 2024

[jordijoangimenez]

Documents for internal discussion can be uploaded here: https://member.5g-mag.com/wg/CD-T/document/folder/122

[haudiobe]

Discussion call 2024/10/10:

• the specified band is not 3GPP compatible. There are other features that can not directly be referenced in 3GPP. Some discussion needed.
• @johannmika will schedule offline calls to progress work

[haudiobe]

Template created to not block @johannmika from work https://member.5g-mag.com/wg/CD-T/document/1350