Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Thanks for these contributions, Ming. I have the following comments: 11-20-0979-00-00ax-mac-cr-on-BSS-Load-for-draft 6.0 - "the percentage of time, linearly scaled with 255 representing 100%"
-- if 100% is 255 then it's not a percentage.
I suggest changing "percentage" to "fraction" (3x) - "This percentage is computed"
should similarly be "The field value is computed" (3x) - The resolutions refer to document
xxxx (3x) 11-20-0980-00-00ax-mac-cr-on-MU-Cascading-for-draft 6.0 - "and
also may enable
the exchange of Control frames in both directions" is a bit weird, because the Control frames might only go in one direction, right?
Why not delete "in both directions"?
Or even this whole phrase? - "An MU cascading sequence shall not be exchanged between an AP and a non-AP STA
(#CID 20732 and 20733)
unless" is a bit weird.
Maybe "shall not occur" or "shall not be used"? 11-20-0981-00-00ax-mac-cr-on-Fragmentation-for-draft 6.0 I don't think CID 24364 has really been addressed. Let's look at Level 1, which should be the easiest: — Level 1: support for one dynamic fragment that is a non-A-MPDU [in a PSDU (#24364)],
no support for dynamic fragments in an A-MPDU that is does not contain an S-MPDU.
So what does that mean? It's clear I can only put my dynamic fragments in an S-MPDU, but beyond that it's not clear. Can I have multiple MSDUs fragmented at the same time (on different TIDs)? Can I have multiple MSDUs fragmented at the same time (to different STAs)? If the receiver sees dynamic fragments for different MSDUs from the same STA, does it need to assume that the earlier one was abandoned? Etc.
Levels 2 and 3 are even more unclear. It's possible that the intent is that all this "support for one" is intended to be within the scope of a PSDU, i.e. just to prevent you, for level 1, from having an A-MPDU with multiple dynamic fragments, but if so that's not clear at all. Also, it's not clear whether dynamic fragmentation is only for
tx in an HE TB PPDU.
The original point was to make more efficient use of the fixed HE TB PPDU durations, right?
I can't immediately find such a restriction, however. Thanks, 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 ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk From:
*** 802.11 TGax - HEW - High Efficiency WLAN *** <STDS-802-11-TGAX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Osama Aboul-Magd Thanks Ming. I’ll add to the agenda. Regards; Osama. On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:34 AM Ganming (Ming) <ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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 |