[STDS-802-11-TGAK] Contribution for discussion

Thread Links	Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Dear All

I have uploaded a document which reworks 4.5.3, 4.5.3.1, 4.5.3.2, 4.5.3.3, and 4.5.3.4: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/15/11-15-1016-00-00ak-proposed-text-changes-for-section-4-5-3.docx. I would like to discuss this contribution and the proposed comment resolutions to the related CIDs shown below on tomorrows CC if time allows. Note the proposed resolutions shown below have not been agreed and are simply my suggested resolutions for these CIDs. Also note that for CID 214 I have not proposed as resolution as it was assigned to Norm Finn, but I have included below so that the list below is a complete list of the CIDs for the sections being addressed by this contribution.

CID	Commenter	LB	Draft	Clause Number(C)	Page(C)	Line(C)	Type of Comment	Part of No Vote	Page	Line	Clause	Duplicate of CID	Resn Status	Assignee	Submission	Motion Number	Comment	Proposed Change	Resolution	Owning Ad-hoc	Comment Group
159	Mark Hamilton	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	28	E	Y	11.28	28	4.5.3.3			Joseph Levy			These paragraphs, while technically correct, have concepts a bit jumbled up making it hard for the reader.	Move the (newly added) last setence to be a standalong paragraph, between the two paragraphs here, and add "In the GLK case, " to the front of the sentence.	Revised - The paragraph has been un-jumbled, as shown in 11-15-1016r0.	EDITOR	Editorial1
183	James Lepp	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	37	E	N	11.37	37	4.5.3.4			Joseph Levy			Confusing sentance: In the GLK case when between different APs, such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement of the corresponding ISS SAP provided by the current GLK AP and the creation or enablement of a corresponding ISS SAP provided by the next GLK AP.	In the GLK case a BSS-transition between different APs results in the removal or disablement of the corresponding ISS SAP provided by the current GLK AP and the creation or enablement of a corresponding ISS SAP provided by the next GLK AP.	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Editorial1
184	James Lepp	212	1	4.5.3.5	12	10	T	Y	12.10	10	4.5.4.5			Mark Hamilton			This paragraph isn't complete. For the non-GLK case it talks about an ESS, for the GLK case it talks about only an AP. Is there nothing for the non-AP STA to do?	Complete the description for the AP and non-AP STA in the GLK case.	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Editorial2
189	James Lepp	212	1	4.5.3.4	12	3	E	N	12.03	3	4.5.3.4		V				Is Bridge capitalized or not? Written differently in the same sentence.	Use consistent capitalization	REVISED (EDITOR: 2015-05-15 00:07:40Z) Bridge should not be capitalized unless it is at the beginning of a sentence or there is some other special reason. The Editor will fix this.	EDITOR	Waikoloa
214	Andrew Myles	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	39	T	N	11.39	39	4.5.3.4			Norm Finn			Should 11ak provide mechanisms for fast convergence after roaming w/o floods of source learning?	802.11r supports fast roaming, but not sure what 802.1Q has, and wireless devices are by their very nature more mobile. Should we have a mechanism to migrate the ISS SAP vs removal/disablement? If 802.1Q has such mechanisms, it would be good to call out explicitly and require their usage.		EDITOR	Clause4
296	Richard Roy	212	1	4.5.3	11	13	E	N	11.13	13	4.5.3		V				The title of 4.5.3 is confusing to say the least ... "Services that support ... service". Furthermore, "GLK APs" doesn't seem to belong in the least as it doesn't point to a "service".	Change the title to something more "readable"	REVISED (EDITOR: 2015-07-16 01:19:42Z) - Change Clause title to "Connectivity related services" Revised: Change Clause title to "Services that support the DS, GLK APs, and the PCP service" As shown in 11-15-1016r0.	EDITOR	Waikoloa
297	Richard Roy	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	26	T	N	11.26	26	4.5.3.3		V	-		1	Stating "or creates or enables" is a bit too loose.	Perhaps "or creates and enables" is intended. (Also STA to AP should be hyphenated in the previous line.)	REVISED (TECHNICAL: 2015-05-12 02:58:28Z) - Replaced with "or enables and, if necessary, creates" Revise: Delete the end of the sentence, which removes the objected to text and add sentences that describes how a GLK link is established: "To establish a GLK link via a GLK AP a GLK STA associates with the GLK AP. The GLK AP then creates a bridge port on the bridged attached to the GLK AP which is logically linked to the bridge port in the GLK STA. This process establishes a point to point GLK link. ". As shown in 11-15-1016r0.	EDITOR	Vancouver
298	Richard Roy	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	28	T	N	11.28	28	4.5.3.3		V	-		1	"The 802.1Q Bridge uses this information to enable and update bridging information" has no clear antecedent for "this information", and the meaning of "enable bridging information" is not clear.	Clarify here and in paragraph 2 of 4.5.4.5.	REVISED (TECHNICAL: 2015-05-12 03:03:33Z) Change "enable and update bridging information" to "enable and update bridging". Revised - delete this sentence, as shown in 11-15-1016r0.	EDITOR	Vancouver
299	Richard Roy	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	39	E	N	11.39	39	4.5.3.4			Joseph Levy			"In the GLK case when between different APs," ... text is missing.	Perhaps "In the GLK case, when transitioning between different APs,"	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Editorial1
363	David Hunter	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	18	E	Y	11.18	18	4.5.3.3			Joseph Levy			"In the non-GLK case, to deliver a message within a DS,": what is "the non-GLK case"? This phrase needs a definition. Is this "case" the situation when no STAs, AP or relay STAs provide GLK functionality? Or does this just mean a non-GLK AP?	Define (probably in 3.2) the meaning of both "the non-GLK case" and "the GLK case", including whether GLK STAs are ever in the "non-GLK case" and whether non-GLK STAs are ever present in the "GLK case". Specify also whether these cases apply to BSS functionality or just to a specific frame transmission and receipt. For instance, on line 28 can "In the non-GLK case, reassociation is" be replaced with "In the non-GLK BSS, reassociation is"?	Revised - The section has been reorganized to clarify Association for the case when a DS is used to deliver MSDUs and Association for establishing a GLK link, the text changes are shown in 11-15-1016r0.	EDITOR	Editorial1
364	David Hunter	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	25	E	Y	11.25	25	4.5.3.3			Joseph Levy			"which provides the STA to AP mapping to the DS in the non-GLK case": Figure 4-14c seems to indicate that in the "GLK case", there is no DS. If that is true, then state that directly. So in the non-GLK ESS there is no 802.1Q bridged LAN and in the GLK ESS there is no DS. Is that true? If so, then why does line 28 refer to the the 802.1Q bridge using the information that the DS uses?	State directly whether or not there can be a DS in the GLK ESS and whether or not there can be a 802.1Q bridged LAN in the non-GLK ESS. Can "GLK case" and "non-GLK case" be replaced with "GLK ESS" and "non-GLK ESS"?	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Editorial1
365	David Hunter	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	39	E	Y	11.39	39	4.5.3.4			Joseph Levy			"In the GLK case when between different APs, such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement": it is confusing to say "case when between different APs"; "BSS-transition" does not need a hyphen; and does reassociation _result in_ the ISS SAP changes, or is GLK reassociation the ISS SAP change process itself?	Replace: "In the GLK case when between different APs, such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement" with "When a GLK STA is transitioning between different GLK APs, the reassociation involves the removal or disablement".	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Editorial1
366	David Hunter	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	40	T	Y	11.40	40	4.5.3.4			Mark Hamilton			"such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement of the corresponding ISS SAP provided by the current GLK AP and the creation or enablement of a corresponding ISS SAP": if GLK association involves creation/enablement of an ISS SAP, what is the relationship of this SAP to the association ID (AID)? Where is that relationship specified? Can the ISS SAP be created without an AID being issued to the STA?	Describe the relationship of the association AID and the GLK creation/enablement of an ISS SAP. Where in clauses 9 or 10 is this relationship specified?	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Bridge SAP
432	Joseph Levy	212	1	4.5.3.3	11	28	T	Y	11.28	28	4.5.3.3		V	-		1	It is not clear that the statement regarding the 802.1Q Bridge only applies to the GLK case and it is not clear that the associated non-AP STA in this case is a GLK STA	Add: "For the GLK case", to the beginning of the sentence and clarify that the non-AP STA is a GLK STA if the STA is used for bridging.	REVISED (TECHNICAL: 2015-05-12 03:06:36Z) Add "In the GLK case," to the beginning of the sentence to clarify that the non-AP STA is a GLK STA. Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Vancouver
433	Joseph Levy	212	1	4.5.3.4	11	39	T	Y	11.39	39	4.5.3.4			Mark Hamilton			It would improve readability if it were clear that the STA is moving between BSSs and that removal/disablement of the exiting ISS SAP in the "old" BSS is replaced with an new ISS SAP pair in the "new" BSS.	Replace: "In the GLK case when between different APs, such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement of the corresponding ISS SAP provided by the current GLK AP and the creation or enablement of a corresponding ISS SAP provided by the next GLK AP." With: "In the GLK case when a GLK STA moves from one BSS to another, such a BSS-transition results in the removal or disablement of the ISS SAP provided by the original BSS and the creation or enablement of a new ISS SAP in the BSS that the STA has moved to."	Revised as in 11-15-1016r0	EDITOR	Bridge SAP

Regards,

Joseph Levy

Principal Engineer

InterDigital Communications, Inc

2 Huntington Quadrangle, 4th Floor, South Wing

Melville, New York, 11747-4508 - USA

(o) +1 631.622.4139

(m) +1 516.835.9353

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.