| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hello George,
I haven’t received a response from you so far.
As I would like to make it clear before the next TGax call which is approaching in 14 hours, I would repeat my requests.
When responding to an A-MPDU that does not include an EOF MPDU but includes one or more non-EOF MPDUs that are QoS Data frames belonging to the same block ack agreement and with
the Ack Policy Indication subfield equal to Implicit BAR for at least one MPDU,
1.
If it is allowed to send a Multi-STA BlockAck frame other than the one in all ack context, then I would suggest to change the part saying
“… a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to 1” to
“… a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to
0 or set to 1 …”.
2.
If it is prohibited to send a Multi-STA BlockAck frame other than the one in all ack context, then I would suggest to change the latter part to
“… or, if all the MPDUs carried in the eliciting A-MPDU were received, with a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to 1 and
…”. For the resolution column, I would request to add “This case only allows to use the Multi-STA BlockAck frame when all the MPDUs were received correctly and that is sent in the all ack context format.”.
Best regards, tomo From: *** 802.11 TGax - HEW - High
Efficiency WLAN *** <STDS-802-11-TGAX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Tomo Adachi Hi George, Thank you very much for taking time for my comments 24093, 24094, and so forth.
For example, it says in 26.4.4.2 4) as follows:
If the A-MPDU does not include an EOF MPDU but does include one or more non-EOF MPDUs that are QoS Data frames belonging to the same block ack agreement and with the Ack Policy Indication subfield
equal to Implicit BAR for at least one MPDU, then the STA shall either respond with a Compressed BlockAck frame as defined in 10.25.6.5 (Generation and transmission of BlockAck frames by an HT STA, DMG STA, or S1G STA) or a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack
Type field set to 1 and the TID field set to 14 as defined in 26.4.2 (Acknowledgment context in a Multi-STA BlockAck frame) if the recipient has indicated support for the all ack context by setting the All Ack Support subfield in the HE MAC Capabilities Information
field to 1. My understanding was that Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to 0 can be also used in this case.
If that understanding is true, then I would suggest to change the part saying
“… a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to 1” to
“… a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to
0 or set to 1 …” If, as Mark said during the call, this case only allows the all ack context case for the Multi-STA BlockAck frame, I agree the sentence is correct.
But still in that case, to make it more clear, I would suggest to change the latter part to
“… or, if all the MPDUs carried in the eliciting A-MPDU were received, with a Multi-STA BlockAck frame with Ack Type field set to 1 and
…”. And I would like to see that is clarified in the rejection reason something like
“Rejected This case only allows to use the Multi-STA BlockAck frame when all the MPDUs were received correctly and that is sent in the all ack context format.” Best regards, tomo To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGAX list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAX&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGAX list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAX&A=1 |