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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBC] TGbc: Mandating DL negotiations procedure

Hi All,


Thank you for your inputs.

 

Can we use one of the pending CID to bring in this change to the draft?

Regards,
Abhi

 

From: ** STDS-802-11-TGbc -- Enhanced Broadcast Service ** <STDS-802-11-TGBC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Stephen McCann
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2022 2:25 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBC] TGbc: Mandating DL negotiations procedure

 

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Dear all,

               yes, I think that is how you state a negative within the PICS.

 

Kind regards

 

Stephen

 

On Fri, 13 May 2022 at 07:20, ANTONIO DE LA OLIVA DELGADO <aoliva@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I also agree, thanks

 

El jue., 12 may. 2022 22:31, Xiaofei Wang <00001995ce968e76-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:

Hi Mike,

 

Thanks for the suggestion. Looks good to me.

 

Best regards,

Xiaofei Clement Wang

Principal Engineer | InterDigital

T: (631) 622.4028

E: Xiaofei.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

From: ** STDS-802-11-TGbc -- Enhanced Broadcast Service ** <STDS-802-11-TGBC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of M Montemurro
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 2:40 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBC] TGbc: Mandating DL negotiations procedure

 

 

Hi Abhi,

 

It's been awhile since I've worked on the PICS, however I believe you express the dependency as:

NOT CFSTARXOnly AND ( existing condition)

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

 

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 2:27 PM Abhishek Patil <appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Mike,

 

How do we represent an Rx-only STA in the PICS section?

Regards,
Abhi

 

From: M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 11:20 AM
To: Abhishek Patil <appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBC] TGbc: Mandating DL negotiations procedure

 

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Hi Abhi,

 

I agree with your assessment. We could make the condition mandatory on a STA that is not an RX-only STA.

 

Cheers,

 

Mike

 

On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 12:35 PM Abhishek Patil <appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Xiaofei, All,

As discussed during today’s TGbc call, the framework allows an rx-only STA to receive EBCS content.

 

Therefore, I have some concern with tagging the DL negotiations procedures as mandatory in the PICS section.

 

I’m initiating this thread for us to have an offline discussion on the topic.

 

I have copied a snapshot of pg 106:

 

 

Regards,
Abhi

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

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

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

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

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

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