R1-2601817
discussion
Discussion on downlink control channel, scheduling for DL and UL transmission
From Spreadtrum
Spreadtrum's prior position on
10.5.4.1
at
RAN1#124
· AI-synthesized, paraphrased
verify sources →
Proposes reducing the number of fallback DCI formats to exactly one DL and one UL format with identical size, and requires that fields and bit lengths in DCI scrambled by specific RNTIs be fixed and independent of RRC configurations. Presents a technical case against NR's use of four DL/UL unicast DCI format pairs, citing extreme PDCCH blind decoding complexity and cumbersome size alignment procedures. Proposes studying two-stage DCI structures where only first-stage DCI undergoes blind detection and second-stage DCI carries variable payload without blind decoding, specifically to support multi-carrier scheduling and mixed services with better spectrum utilization. Proposes identifying and clarifying which functions necessitate group common DCI rather than unicast DCI, and narrows the scope to only TPC-related commands and energy efficiency functions like NES or UE power saving.
Summary
{ "summary": "This Spreadtrum contribution discusses downlink control channel and scheduling design for 6GR, presenting 120 proposals and 21 observations across DCI formats, DCI structures, DCI size/budget, L1 signaling for DL/UL scheduling, PDCCH energy efficiency, and two-stage DCI. Key positions include reusing NR's 140-bit maximum DCI payload and existing DCI size budget, supporting a unified/modular DCI framework with Case 1 (single-block) and Case 2 (multi-block) containers, and prioriti