Ambient IoT — a tag with no battery

Easy to get wrong

• 1.4 What Ambient IoT is meant to be

  "Low power" is the wrong frame. The radio work did not set out to shave power off an existing design — its own words describe "ultra-low complexity devices with ultra-low power consumption for the very-low end IoT applications", and the study it opened with was about whether such a thing is buildable at all. ^[1]

• 2.4 How an area of work like this runs

  Phase 2 is not a repair of phase 1. Its studies open new ground — a second topology, outdoor scenarios, charging — while the phase 1 specifications stay where they are.

• 3.5 The map of the groups, and where the weight sat

  A per-work-item document count is not a per-group document count either. The group table above counts documents by the group that filed them; the work item table counts them by the name they were filed against. The two answer different questions and will not reconcile.

• 4.2 The radio side and the architecture side

  Leading no work item does not mean doing no work. RAN3 filed 805 documents and carries 77 changes to one protocol alone; the leadership column and the work column measure different things. RAN3

• 5.3 The specifications this work touches

  A TR is not a smaller TS. Nobody builds from a report; it exists to record how a question was settled, and the specifications that follow it are separate documents with separate numbers.

• 6.5 Where the work stands

  "Rel-19 Ambient IoT is done" is a sentence this record does not support. Most of it is at 100, one security item sits at 95 past its target date, and conformance testing is a third of the way through. AmbientIoT-SEC Ambient_IoT_Solutions_plus_CT1_SA3-ConTest

• 7.1 How to follow it yourself, and what the record cannot tell you

  Two rows above show 1379 and four CT items share 959, because the count is per short name. Do not add any column of this table up. AmbientIoT-CT