|
Hi Mark,
:-)
CID 4741 is yours. In it you state that the fragmentation/reassembly scheme
described in section 9.41 and 9.42 of the TGai draft is overly complex.
No, in this CID I state that the description of the fragmentation/reassembly
scheme, in terms of M and N, is overly complex.
Would you
please generate a submission for TGai describing a simpler scheme because I'm
unable to do it.
I provided this as a proposed change:
"The information to be fragmented is divided into chunks, in order. The element into which the data would not fit is filled with the first chunk of data and is termed the leading element. The length of the information in the leading element shall be 255.
This element shall be immediately followed by zero or more Fragment elements, each containing the next chunk of information. The length of the information in these elements shall also be 255. Finally, if there is a remaining chunk, this shall be contained
in an immediately following Fragment element."
Then I will, respectfully, reject your comment as your suggestion is what I
call "comment bait", i.e. text that, if included, will result in more comments.
Why would a fragmented element be followed by zero ("zero or more")
fragment elements? It wouldn't be fragmented in that case. And how can
all fragment elements following the first fragmented element be 255
in length when there may be a "remaining chunk"? How do we pad that
final fragment element out to 255 if the size of the "remaining chunk" is
less than 255? What is an "immediately following" fragment element and
how does it differ from fragment elements that are not "immediately
following"? Et cetera et cetera et cetera.
Which isn't to say that your suggestion couldn't be cleaned up to remove its
"comment bait" characteristics, just that I'm not gonna do it because I don't
think the M+N stuff is overly complex, it's just correct and complete. If you
would like to clean it up and generate a submission please do so as I would
be happy to reassign this CID (and the others!) to you.
Also, would you be willing to take ownership of the other 18 CIDs related to
these sections since you'd, effectively, be rewriting the whole thing?
Not at this stage, at least in part because I am not sure what my
or TGai's position is on some of them, e.g.:
CID 4513/5089: "Why has another fragmentation scheme been developed here?
Why not re-use the GAS fragmentation scheme design for pre-association
public action frames?"
CID 4897: "It is better to have all data as self-describing rather than
relationally describing - that is, it would be better if the fragment IE
contained two more fields - the IE number of the IE being fragmented and
the fragment number of this fragment"
CID 4902: "An element contains fields. Even if the Fragmentatoin element
allows the element length to go beyond 255, fields cannot be fragmented
across elements. There is no description of how to fragment a field that
has been broken across elements. Furthermore, the length of the
fragmented element is not specified."
Well, it would require contacting the commenters and querying the TG.
Basically owning the text. But I guess I'll have to do it as the CIDs are still
assigned to me.
thanks,
Dan.
Mark
--
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français
Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600
Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS Fax: +44 1223 434601
-----Original Message-----
Sent: 13 May 2014 08:46
To: Mark Rison
Subject: CID 4741 from LB201
Hi Marc,
CID 4741 is yours. In it you state that the fragmentation/reassembly scheme
described in section 9.41 and 9.42 of the TGai draft is overly complex. Would you
please generate a submission for TGai describing a simpler scheme because I'm
unable to do it.
Also, would you be willing to take ownership of the other 18 CIDs related to
these sections since you'd, effectively, be rewriting the whole thing?
thanks,
Dan.
_______________________________________________________________________________
IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this
CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand.
SELF SERVICE OPTION:
Point your Browser to - http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAI and
then amend your subscription on the form provided. If you require removal from the reflector
press the LEAVE button.
Further information can be found at: http://www.ieee802.org/11/Email_Subscribe.html
_______________________________________________________________________________
|