Signify Classified - Internal
Dear Chong,
Thank you for this update. Just to confirm, do I understand correctly that this means that you are no longer proposing to include any of
the changes in 11-21/276r4 into the draft text?
Thanks,
-Nancy
From: ** STDS-802-11-TGbb -- Light Communication Task Group** <STDS-802-11-TGBB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Chong Han
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 12:51 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBB] 11-21-0276-03-00bb-proposed-text-for-4-4 (1).docx
|
CAUTION: This email is from outside the organization. Do not click
on links or open attachments unless you trust the sender. |
Dear all,
I’d like to brief you the progress of document 11-21/0276.
We proposed the changes to make in 4.4 because they are either not available in the IEEE 802.11a or not supported by LC. Then based on the comments we got from Robert and Peter,
we reviewed the proposed changes again. Here’s our finding:
TPC and DFS were stated for 5GHz only.
DSE could be used by LC devices in the future if there are unlicensed devices to be connected
with licensed devices.
Radio management service is all about report or performing radio management which could be
left as is.
According to Robert’s suggestion, although some of them do not apply to LC, we don’t need to state it in 4.4 since many other standards
didn’t have done it though they are not available in those standards.
Regards,
Chong
Get
Outlook for iOS
From: ** STDS-802-11-TGbb -- Light Communication Task Group** <STDS-802-11-TGBB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
on behalf of Jungnickel, Volker <volker.jungnickel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 7:43 am
To:
STDS-802-11-TGBB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBB] WG: 11-21-0276-03-00bb-proposed-text-for-4-4 (1).docx
FYI
Von: Peter Ecclesine (pecclesi) [mailto:pecclesi@xxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 9. März 2021 05:48
An: Robert Stacey <rjstacey@xxxxxxxxx>; Jungnickel, Volker <volker.jungnickel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc:
nikola.serafimovski@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Chong Han (chong.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx) <chong.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Betreff: RE: 11-21-0276-03-00bb-proposed-text-for-4-4 (1).docx
Following on from Robert, in amendments:
The editing instructions are shown in
bold italic. Four editing instructions are used: change, delete, insert, and replace.
Change
is used to make corrections in existing text or tables. The editing instruction specifies the location of the change
and describes what is being changed by using strikethrough (to remove old material) and underscore (to add new material).
Delete
removes existing material. Insert
adds new material without disturbing the existing material. Insertions may
require renumbering. If so, renumbering instructions are given in the editing instruction.
Replace is used to make changes
in figures or equations by removing the existing figure or equation and replacing it with a new one. Editing instructions,
change markings, and this NOTE will not be carried over into future editions because the changes will be incorporated
into the base standard.
|
|
|
|
Peter Ecclesine Technology Analyst +1.408.722.8489 |
Cisco Systems
|
From: Robert Stacey <rjstacey@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 12:39 PM
To: Jungnickel, Volker <volker.jungnickel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Ecclesine (pecclesi) <pecclesi@xxxxxxxxx>;
nikola.serafimovski@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Chong Han (chong.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx) <chong.han@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 11-21-0276-03-00bb-proposed-text-for-4-4 (1).docx
Hello Volker,
For 1), yes this is the correct way to indicate the change: an editing instruction starting with the verb "change" (Change the 2nd paragraph as follows:) And then
underline showing the inserted text. However, you just want to underline the inserted text and not the whole line, i.e., "j) DFS
(not LC facility)"
For 2), I don't think calling out (no LC facility) or (not for LC) is necessary here. Using DFS as an example: DFS is only applicable to some channels in some regulatory
domains. It is certainly not universal, so your change would just highlight this (not LC, but what about "not 2.4 GHz band").
I would avoid adding too much detail to this introductory clause.
-Robert
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:43 AM Jungnickel, Volker <volker.jungnickel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Peter, Robert,
I was asked to relay some questions to you.
In the enclosed document, the underlined text indicates changes requested by TGbb to the 802.11 Editor.
1) Is this the right way to indicate any changes here
2) What do you suggest
a. j) DFS (no LC facility) or
b. j) DFS (not for LC)
Thanks and best regards - Volker
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBB list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBB&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBB list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBB&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBB list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBB&A=1