Re: [STDS-802-11-TGAX] Discussion on MU cascading sequence on Sept 3 cal

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

Konbanwa Tomo-san,

I don’t want to change the second proposed sentence into a note.

Although 26.6 refers to tables in 9.7.3, it is not explicitly saying about the bi-directional case.

Note that the aggregation of the acknowledgement and triggering frame is included in the tables in 9.7.3, but it is only for the MU cascading sequence. So, it is the same level with that.

The downlink data especially in the middle of the sequence together with the acknowledgement and the triggering frames is allowed only for the MU cascading sequence.

I must admit I'm not quite sure what you mean here. What does "same level" mean here?

Yes, DL data + ack + TF is only allowed for MU casc, but that's because ack+TF is only allowed for MU casc, even if there's no DL data.

In contrast, DL data + TF is allowed even if MU casc is not supported.

Would

NOTE—An A-MPDU sent by an AP in an MU cascading sequence might include, in addition to the acknowledgement and triggering frames, one or more QoS Data frames with ack policy HETP Ack and/or a Management frame soliciting acknowledgement, subject to the rules in 26.6.

be better for you?

Yoroshiku onegaishimasu,

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: tomo.adachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <tomo.adachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, 7 September 2020 01:29
To: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGAX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; liwen.chu@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Discussion on MU cascading sequence on Sept 3 call

Liwen, Robert,

Please provide your comments (agreeing or objecting to my response below, whatever is fine).

Hello Mark-san,

Welcome back!

For the change in the first sentence, your point makes sense. I’m fine with

- Change the first sentence in 26.5.3 MU cascading sequence to “An MU cascading sequence is a frame exchange sequence between an AP and one or more non-AP STAs in which the AP, within a single PPDU, acknowledges one or more frames from a STA, and triggers the STA for a further UL transmission."

I’m fine with deleting “The A-MPDU may contain other MPDUs, subject to the rules in 26.6 (A-MPDU operation in an HE PPDU).”.

But I don’t want to change the second proposed sentence into a note.

Although 26.6 refers to tables in 9.7.3, it is not explicitly saying about the bi-directional case.

Note that the aggregation of the acknowledgement and triggering frame is included in the tables in 9.7.3, but it is only for the MU cascading sequence. So, it is the same level with that.

The downlink data especially in the middle of the sequence together with the acknowledgement and the triggering frames is allowed only for the MU cascading sequence.

Best regards,

tomo

From: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 7:21 PM
To: adachi tomoko(足立朋子 ○ＲＤＣ□ＩＴ研○ＷＳＬ) <tomo.adachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGAX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; liwen.chu@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Discussion on MU cascading sequence on Sept 3 call

- Change the first sentence in 26.5.3 MU cascading sequence to “An MU cascading sequence is a frame exchange sequence between an AP and one or more non-AP STAs in which the AP, within a single PPDU, acknowledges one or more frames in an UL transmission from a STA, and triggers the STA for a further UL transmission."

I'm basically OK with this, but on reflection maybe I would delete "in an UL

transmission" since a transmission to an AP must by definition be UL, so having

those words sows confusion.

- Add a sentence, “The MU cascading sequence may include one or more QoS Data frames with ack policy HTPE Ack and/or Management frame soliciting acknowledgement together with a triggering frame.”, at the beginning of the paragraph that starts with “The MU cascading sequence may have a different set of transmitters in HE TB PPDUs …” in 26.5.3.

I think that if we add such a sentence, we should delete

The A-MPDU may contain other MPDUs, subject to the rules in 26.6 (A-MPDU operation in

an HE PPDU).

in the previous para, since it's basically saying the same thing with

different level of detail. However, it also seems to me that this new

sentence is not anything new, just a reminder of existing normative

material, so I think it should be a:

NOTE—An A-MPDU sent by an AP in an MU cascading sequence might include one or more QoS Data frames with ack policy HETP Ack and/or a Management frame soliciting acknowledgement, subject to the rules in 26.6.

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 Tomo Adachi
Sent: Friday, 4 September 2020 02:01
To: STDS-802-11-TGAX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGAX] Discussion on MU cascading sequence on Sept 3 call

Hi all,

We had a discussion on the MU cascading sequence on today’s TGax call.

The final direction there was as follows:

- Change the first sentence in 26.5.3 MU cascading sequence to “An MU cascading sequence is a frame exchange sequence between an AP and one or more non-AP STAs in which the AP, within a single PPDU, acknowledges one or more frames in an UL transmission from a STA, and triggers the STA for a further UL transmission."

The latter modification was added due to Liwen’s request.

And there were no further comments during the call.

Comments are welcome, especially from those that didn’t attend the call today.

It will be on the agenda again on Sept. 17 call.

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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGAX] Discussion on MU cascading sequence on Sept 3 call