Hi Wookbong,
Thanks for the replies and considering my suggestion. And your example is a good one.
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
9:03
收件人: Yujian (Ross Yu) <ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: RE: [PHY] SU SIG contents, 11-20/285
Hi Ross,
Thanks for question.
For SP1, do you want to put something like “whether BW/Puncturing info can be different for different 80MHz is TBD?”
We can run SP after Jianhan’s contribution.
For second SP, whether we will have SU PPDU or not is TBD as Sameer mentioned. Personally I prefer having SU PPDU, but (partial) STA-ID in the EHT-SIG.
(Please refer 11-20/285, especially slide 8)
Rational for including STA-ID in PPDU is for non-STR MLD STA. Please find more explanation in below. I copied from contribution.
•
For certain conditions, non-STR STA resumes countdown on link B during busy state on link A
•
Similar to 802.11ax SRP-based spatial reuse backoff procedure
•
Inter-BSS PPDU
(e.g. BSS Color)
o
Backoff countdown can be resumed as frame not for non-STR STA
•
Intra-BSS Uplink PPDU
o
Backoff countdown can be resumed, similar to above
o
UL/DL bit in HE-SIG-A for HE SU PPDU/ER SU PPDU
o
UL MU identified by HE TB PPDU
•
Intra-BSS Downlink PPDU
o
Backoff countdown can be resumed if PPDU identified to be not destined to itself
o
STA ID in HE-SIG-B for HE MU PPDU or unable to decode HE-SIG-B of HE MU PPDU
o
No STA ID info in PHY preamble for SU PPDU and MAC header decoding can take long
o
Proposal:
STA ID info in EHT PHY preamble for SU PPDU
Please let me know if this is still not clear.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Wook Bong Lee
From: Yujian (Ross Yu) [mailto:ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2020 5:47 PM
To: Wook Bong Lee <wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: 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:
- 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”
- 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,
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