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

[STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [PHY] SU SIG contents, 11-20/285

Hi Wookbong,

 

Thanks for using the email reflectorJ and trying to harmonize the SPs to make the CC more efficient.

 

For SP1, regarding the 3rd subbullet, BW/Puncturing info can be different for different 80MHz. I think this mechanism still needs to be fully discussed from both MAC/PHY point of view before we run the SP. Meantime, Jianhan’s contribution is still in the queue.

 

For SP2, could you or people in the group share more info about the benefits of carrying STA ID for SU transmission? I don’t find a clear answer myself. The question actually also applies to using HE MU PPDU format for SU transmission back in 11ax.

 

regards

于健 Ross Yu

Huawei Technologies

 

发件人: Wook Bong Lee [mailto:wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020年3月20日 8:36
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [PHY] SU SIG contents, 11-20/285

 

Hi Sameer,

 

Thanks for quick response and suggestions.

 

I am fine with all of your suggestion.

I will update SPs accordingly.

Will wait for more discussion before upload revision 3.

 

SP#1

•          Do you support that U-SIG in each 80MHz shall carry puncturing channel info for at-least the specific 80MHz where it is transmitted?

?        Note1: Each STA needs to decode U-SIG in only one 80MHz segment

?        Note2: Within each 80MHz segment, U-SIG is duplicated in every non-punctured 20MHz

?        BW/Puncturing info can be different for different 80MHz

?        Whether BW and puncturing info bits in U-SIG are carried as a combined or a separate field is TBD

SP#2

•          Do you agree to have STA-ID related information in an EHT PPDU sent to a single user?

 

Best regards,

Wook Bong Lee

 

From: Sameer Vermani [mailto:svverman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 5:18 PM
To: Wook Bong Lee <wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [PHY] SU SIG contents, 11-20/285

 

Thanks Wook Bong for this harmonization attempt.  I overall agree with the ideas in your straw-polls.  I have two minor comments which you might want to consider:

 

  1. To aid clarity, maybe you can change the TBD bullet in SP1 to: “Whether BW and puncturing info bits in U-SIG are carried as a combined or a separate field is TBD”
  2. In SP2, since we have not decided if there will be an SU PPDU (which is separate from MU PPDU), maybe you can word it as follows: “Do you agree to have STA-ID related information in an EHT PPDU sent to a single user?”

 

Regards,

Sameer

 

 

From: Wook Bong Lee <wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 4:33 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [PHY] SU SIG contents, 11-20/285

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization.

Hi PHY fans,

 

This is an email to discuss straw poll for SU SIG contents in 11-20/285.

During 3/18 conference call, there was a request to discuss straw poll using e-mail reflector.

If you are not interested in this topic, sorry for this e-mail.

 

    • 285r1 SU PPDU SIG Contents Consideration (Wook Bong Lee)

First, Eunsung asked to defer the straw poll since he has some more puncturing pattern to propose, and it may impact the signaling design.

Eunsung’s contribution was discussed 3/18 call, and there was no agreement to add more puncturing pattern.

Second, after I review following two contributions,

    • 380r0 U-SIG Structure and Preamble Processing (Sameer Vermani)
    • 439r0 Efficient EHT Preamble Design (Jianhan Liu)

I agreed with some of ideas in those contributions, i.e. allowing a STA to know exact what is puncturing pattern for the 80MHz.

I believe this is useful not only for a different STA to camp different 80MHz (note this feature itself needs more discussion in MAC Adhoc or in Joint group) but also for a non-associated STA to decode FILS or Unsolicited Probe Response frame in MU PPDU which is supported in 11ax for 6GHz operation.

So, I modified SP accordingly.

 

In addition to that, we want to propose to include STA-ID related information in SU PPDU as well to aid non-STR STA for MLD operation. Please refer 11-20/285 or 11-19/1405r7, “Multi-link Channel Access Discussion” for more discussion.

 

These are proposed SPs in 11-20/285r2. Uploaded revision 2 in the server.

SP#1

•          Do you support that U-SIG in each 80MHz shall carry puncturing channel info for at-least the specific 80MHz where it is transmitted?

?        Note1: Each STA needs to decode U-SIG in only one 80MHz segment

?        Note2: Within each 80MHz segment, U-SIG is duplicated in every non-punctured 20MHz

?        BW/Puncturing info can be different for different 80MHz

?        TBD: separate BW and puncturing info bits in U-SIG

SP#2

•          Do you agree to have STA-ID related information for SU PPDU in EHT-SIG?

 

If you have any question or any suggested modification, please let us know.

 

Best regards,

Wook Bong Lee

 

 

 

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1