| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Thanks, Erik. I was wondering about Passive Location Ranging – it did not sound right. Passive Location Sounding is much better. I do have some qualms about using Location in some places and Ranging in others but I think that can wait till
the next round. In all cases, the measurement exchange protocol only accomplishes Ranging. Determination of Location requires the triangulation (using the LCI of the pertinent RSTAs and the corresponding Range estimates against each one of them) which
is out-of-scope for our amendment. Strictly speaking we should change all use of Location to Range/Ranging. Cheers -- ganesh “It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” – Harry Truman Ganesh, I think in D1.3 we will have: “Poll, Sounding, Secure Sounding, Report, Passive Location Sounding”, so maybe we will be good. (We had submission, 11-19/1041r2, that changed the ‘Passive Location Ranging’ to ‘Passive Location Sounding’.) Erik From: Venkatesan, Ganesh [mailto:ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx]
Hello Erik: My work is not thorough. You point out an omission. I may have the Passive versus Passive Location Sounding incorrect. Looking at table 9-25k, which enumerates the subvariant as Passive Location Ranging, I think we should fix it to be Passive Location Sounding. So, my regular _expression_ should have been: Ranging Trigger frame of subvariant {Poll, Sounding, Secure Sounding, Report, Passive Location Sounding} Cheers -- ganesh “It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” – Harry Truman From: Erik Lindskog <e.lindskog@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Ganesh, So currently we have: “Poll, Sounding, Secure Sounding, Report, Passive Location Sounding” So the change you are proposing is to change “Passive Location Sounding” to “Passive”? I think at the very least we should call it “Passive Sounding”, though I am thinking we might as well stick with what we have for the subvariants. I think that is more descriptive and currently I think we never refer to “Passive” on its
own. Think it is always “Passive Location Ranging”, or as here to make it a little shorter “Passive Location (Sounding)”. Erik From: *** 802.11 TGaz - NGP - Next Generation Positioning *** [mailto:STDS-802-11-TGAZ@xxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Venkatesan, Ganesh Hello Ali: We had a short debate/discussion on how variant/subvariant of trigger frames defined in TGaz are refered in the draft. First off we have a Ranging variant and not a Location variant – see Table 9-25b In Clause 11.22.6.4.3.2 where we describe Polling we use, Each polling part instance includes a single (#1890) a Ranging Trigger frame of subvariant Poll
(see 9.3.1.22.9 Ranging Trigger variant). SO, I think the consistent reference to trigger frames would be “Ranging Trigger frame of subvariant {Poll, Sounding, Secure Sounding, Report, Passive} Cheers -- ganesh “It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don’t care who gets the credit.” – Harry Truman To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGAZ list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAZ&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGAZ list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGAZ&A=1 |