| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Thanks, Sameer. I am also fine with the SP without the number of users. Hope we can move forward with it. Best regards, Wook Bong Lee From: Sameer Vermani [mailto:svverman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Wookbong, Thanks for your comments.
It’s Ross’s SP in the end, so I will leave it to him as to whether he wants to add the “number of users” part or not. I just mentioned what I would be comfortable with at this point
of time as far as the SP goes. Maybe it will make sense for the RU allocation sub-field to also tell the “number of users”, but that’s a detail I would like to discuss later as we need more time to think about it.
Regards, Sameer From: Wook Bong Lee <wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of
the organization. Hi Sameer, Thanks for discussion. Don’t get me wrong. I was asking whether that was his intention. Anyway, I would like to know your detailed design so that we can see how it works. I don’t know what is the benefit of splitting a number of users allocated to each RU from the RU Allocation subfield. If your proposal is to make it simplify signaling, then I would like to repeat what I mentioned to Ron for self-contained design. We already have a parsing algorithm for 11ax, at least that part it does not complicate the implementation, actually changing from that complicates the implementation. As far as I know, Ross’s new design is to reduce the number of bits for the RU Allocation subfield.
Still, his design preserves the 11ax part. Best regards, Wook Bong Lee From: Sameer Vermani [mailto:svverman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Ross, Thanks for the updated SP text. Regarding SP1, I like your new proposed text. I actually would
not like to add what Wook Bong is proposing below as there might be a possibility for some or all of the MU-MIMO modes to be signaled through a compressed mode. Hence, I think the “number of users allocated to each RU” maybe signaled in a different way
for the MU-MIMO modes (including packets where MU-MIMO is being done on part of the PPDU BW). Regarding SP2, I agree with Wook Bong that it maybe premature to discuss the table right now. I would prefer to defer that discussion and focus on higher level concepts for now. Thanks, Sameer From: Wook Bong Lee <wookbong.lee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of
the organization. Hi Ross, Thanks for this. I would like to focus on first SP.
You may want to add ‘except TB PPDU’ after ‘an EHT PPDU sent to multiple users’.
One more ting, in 11ax, the RU allocation table is indicating number of users allocated to each RU as in the text you captured.
You don’t want to capture that part? also indicates information needed to compute the number of users allocated to each RU Second SP, the table you provide is list of potential RU allocation which is trivial based on agreements so far.
So, maybe better to discuss more detail concept than the table.
Table itself can be developed based on high level concept agreement later.
We may have different row order than your table in below. It can be confusing.
One note, below rows can be TBD rows as well.
Best regards, Wook Bong Lee From: Yujian (Ross Yu) [mailto:ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx]
Hi all, Last meeting, the agreement is to prepare a better language regarding RU allocation SPs. Hence I have prepared a revised version with
the updated SPs. The first two SPs are also pasted here. All your comments are welcome. SP1:
Do you agree to add the following to the 11be SFD:
l
An RU Allocation subfield that is present in the Common field of the EHT-SIG field of
an EHT PPDU sent to multiple users, indicates RU assignment, including the size of the RU(s) and their placement in the frequency domain, to be used in the EHT modulated fields of the PPDU in the frequency domain.
o
Compressed modes are TBD. Discussion: Note in 11ax specs, we have the following description: Each RU Allocation subfield in
an HE-SIG-B content channel corresponding to a 20 MHz frequency segment
indicates the RU assignment, including the size of the RU(s) and their placement in the frequency domain, to be used in the HE modulated fields of the HE MU PPDU in the frequency domain, also indicates information needed to compute the number of users
allocated to each RU, where the subcarrier indices of the RU(s) meet the conditions in Table 27-25 (RUs associated with each RU Allocation subfield for each HESIGB content channel and PPDU bandwidth). For SP1, I just try to follow 11ax without mentioning too much details. Note We also have the following passed motion as a baseline:
l
An RU Allocation subfield is present in the Common field of the EHT-SIG field of an EHT PPDU sent to multiple users.
o
Compressed modes are
TBD.
o
Contents of the RU Allocation subfield are
TBD. [Motion 57, [9] and [25]] SP2:
Do you agree that the mapping from the TBD-bit RU Allocation subfield to the RU assignment, contains the following entries:
l
The RUs highlighted in orange means combination. Table XX RU Allocation subfield
Discussion: Now there is argument regarding MU-MIMO support for 106-tone RU, number of entries for MU-MIMO support (8 or 16), large MRU indication
method. The entries in the table now try to avoid those controversial parts. regards 于健 Ross Yu Huawei Technologies 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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||