| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi All, I’ve asked Yongho if he agrees with transferring CID 2032 to the EDITOR, and he agrees to transfer so both can have a single resolution. CID 2095: General GDC operation between GDC dependent STAs and their GDC enabling STA require a secure relationship, which is awkwardly conveyed by the last sentence of the second paragraph. Proposed Change: Rewrite "enabling their operation is occurred in State 4." to make it clear that the GDC dependent STAs shall be associated with their GDC enabling STA. CID 2032: I do not understand "The frame exchange sequence between GDC enabling STA and GDC dependent STAs for enabling their operation is occurred in State 4." What is State 4 (Kansas?) Also the phrase "is accured in State 4" is not
right should it be "occurs in"? Proposed Change: Clarify text as indicated in comment For discussion on March 5th teleconference. Best Regards, petere Peter Ecclesine, Technology Analyst MS SJ-14-4 170 West Tasman Dr, San Jose, CA 95134-1706
Ph 408/527-0815, FAX 408/525-9256 "Time doesn't fool around." "Without Prejudice" U.C.C. 1-207 |