Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBC] transfer CID 1066
Antonio,
since you submitted this comment and since you are in favor of rejecting it,
could you maybe either:
a) draft a suggest test / reason for rejection
or
b) withdraw the comment, which would result in rejection on the basis of being withdrawn by the commenter.
Best,
Marc
> On 16 Apr 2021, at 08:59, ANTONIO DE LA OLIVA DELGADO <aoliva@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Xiaofei, all,
> I have gone through this comment and I think it should be rejected. After all our security discussion I think a non-associated STA should not be able to define the duration of a service being transmitted, it makes sense to have it only in the associated state.
> Thanks
> Antonio
>
> El jue, 15 abr 2021 a las 21:51, Xiaofei Wang (<Xiaofei.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>) escribió:
> Dear Marc, Stephen & Antonio,
>
>
>
> Regarding this CID below, I think it would be better to transfer it to Stephen.
>
>
>
>
>
> 1066
>
> Antonio DeLaOlivaDelgado
>
> 9.4.2.301
>
> 27
>
> 9
>
> T
>
> N
>
> 27.00
>
> 9
>
> 9.4.2.301
>
> Xiaofei Wang
>
> Right now the time to termination can only be requeted in csase of STA associated. Consider adding it to the ANQP case or discuss it
>
> Consider changing it to duration
>
> CHAIR
>
> 2020/12/30 10:24
>
> CHAIR
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Xiaofei Clement Wang
>
> Principal Engineer | InterDigital
>
> T: (631) 622.4028
>
> E: Xiaofei.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Antonio de la Oliva
> Associate Professor
> Telematics Department
> Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
> E-mail: aoliva@xxxxxxxxxx
> Phone: +34 91 624 8803
> Fax: +34 91 624 8749
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBC&A=1