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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [PHY] Segment parsing/tone mapper/interleaver for Multi-RU, 11-20/0394, 11-20/0440r1

Then you need to introduce RU parser for 20MHz. Note we did not have RU parser for less 80MHz segment in 11ax. So introducing 20MHz RU parser only for one RU aggregation sounds not necessary.

 

Thanks,

jianhan

 

From: Liangdandan (2012) [mailto:dandan.liang@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 3:55 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [PHY] Segment parsing/tone mapper/interleaver for Multi-RU, 11-20/0394, 11-20/0440r1

 

Hello Jianhan，

 

Many thanks for replying this email.  Looking forward to your comparison results.

 

Jianhan, I might not explain clearly during your presentation, please let me clarify it again. For my understanding, it is RU parser rather than Segment parser in your contributions. Because in 11ac/ax, one segment (80MHz) only has one RU, so RU parser equals to Segment parser. In 11be, because one STA can be assigned to multi RUs, so here it is straightforward to use RU parser. For example for RU242+RU484+RU996, we have RU parser 20MHz, RU parser 40MHz and RU parser 80MHz,respectively. And we do not need to add new joint tone mapper for RU242+RU484 by using the RU parser definition.

 

 

BR,

Dandan

发件人: Jianhan Liu [mailto:jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020年3月31日 3:09
收件人: Liangdandan (2012) <dandan.liang@xxxxxxxxxx>
抄送: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [PHY] Segment parsing/tone mapper/interleaver for Multi-RU, 11-20/0394, 11-20/0440r1

 

Hi Dandan,

 

Thanks for you email. 

 

Due to outbreak of corona virus, my colleague can not access the data last week. Please give me a couple of days more, and I will send you the comparison results. 

 

By the way, it is not straightforward for 20Mhz as unit for RU parser because in 11ac and 11ax we all use 80MHz segment parser. Also, for a 484-size RU, we use a joint tone interleaver instead of two 242 RUs interleaved separately. Same problem for a 996-size RU,  e use a joint tone interleaver instead of Four 242 RUs interleaved separately. 

 

If we follow your idea to do 20MHz parser, how about the 484 RU and 996 RU  in 11ax and 11be? It is really awkward to have a 20MHz parser for other aggregated RUs but not for 484 RU and 996 RU.

 

Thanks,

Jianhan 

 

On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 9:09 PM Liangdandan (2012) <dandan.liang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello PHY fans,

This is an email to discuss Segment parsing/tone mapper/interleaver for Multi-RU, 11-20/0394, 11-20/0440r1. During 3/26 PHY ad hoc conference call, I requested some simulations comparison between joint interleaver vs separated interleaver for large MRU within 80MHz.

There is a big chance to run the SPs on Monday PHY ad hoc meeting, and the topics are quite important, so I want to discuss it before running the SP through e-mail reflector.

If you are not interested in this topic, sorry for this email.

 

 

Hello Bin and Jianhan，

 

Thanks for your presentations about Doc ID: 20/0394r0, 20/0440r1. The topics are quite important. Could you kindly provide your mentioned simulation results comparison between the joint interleaver and separate interleaver with proportional parser for RU242+RU484, please?

As Bin mentioned in his slides deck, ”Diversity benefit from joint interleaving over 80MHz segment is minor, especially with more antennas“. Could we extend it to joint interleaving over 20MHz? If they have similar performance, why do we introduce new hardware implementation- new LDPC tone mapper?


Regarding the segment parser, agree that it is exactly for 80 MHz in 11ac/ax. However, the parser proposed in 20/0394r0, 20/0440r1, it is not exactly segment parser, actually it is RU parser, for example parser for RU484+RU996. Moreover, the number of branches of the parser is no longer 2.

Given that the basic unit of preamble puncture is 20MHz, it is straightforward to use 20Mhz as unit for RU parser in 11be like boundary discussion for MRU modes.

Now RU242+RU484 is only one case within 80MHz, but later if we have more MUR modes within 80 MHz, do we need to consider its extension? RU parser is better than joint interleaver for extension at this point.

If without new joint interleaver, we can reuse the current 11ax mechanism, and the RU parser for the case of RU242+RU484+RU996 can be solved by 1s:2s:4s as per Jianhan’s proportional round robin parsing method.

 

Looking forward to your reply.

 

Many thanks and Best regards,

Dandan

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 

*********** MEDIATEK Confidentiality Notice ***********
The information contained in this e-mail message (including any 
attachments) may be confidential, proprietary, privileged, or 
otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. It is 
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). Any 
use, dissemination, distribution, printing, retaining or copying 
of this e-mail (including its attachments) by unintended recipient(s) 
is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an 
intended recipient of this e-mail, or believe that you have received 
this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately 
(by replying to this e-mail), delete any and all copies of this 
e-mail (including any attachments) from your system, and do not 
disclose the content of this e-mail to any other person. Thank you!

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