| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
-Minyoung
From: Park, Minyoung
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 10:47 AM
To: Ganming (Ming) <ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1
Hello Ming,
Thanks for your questions. Please see inline below.
Regards,
Minyoung
From: Ganming (Ming) <ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 9:43 AM
To: Park, Minyoung <minyoung.park@xxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1
Hello Minyoung
Thank you for presenting contribution 562r1. Because of very limited Q&A time now (most of Q in the queue can not be answered), I just have a few questions.
Regarding the right figure in slide 4, I understand single radio STA can not receive the frames on more than one link. But you mentioned this single radio STA can switch the link in a few microseconds.
[MP] In the call, I mentioned tens of microseconds, not a few microseconds. Considering the RTS/CTS exchange before data frame reception, the time budget before data frame reception is around 100 usec so we didn’t see any issue for the channel switch.
Then how many LOs inside it?
[MP] Since we assume monitoring two channels, I assume two LOs but this will be more implementation dependent.
Generally speaking, there is just one. I do not how do you make its frequency stable in a few microseconds.
[MP] Please see the answer to the first question.
If it can work, why do you just limit it to one antenna per link while monitoring the channel?
[MP] A client device equipped with 2x2 MIMO configuration can only use one antenna for each channel so transmitting the first packet of a frame exchange sequence in 1SS can cover 2x2 or higher MIMO configurations.
If there is only one antenna for single radio, does it still work？
[MP] Probably not. We were assuming at least 2x2 MIMO configuration or additional 1x1 radio as described in slide4.
For dynamic SM power save, what is the motivation for additional constraints for the first frame of a frame exchange sequence?
[MP] The additional constraints is for low complexity receiving block implementation on each channel (since this is additional capability that needs to be added to the single radio MLD) to look for the first frame of a frame exchange sequence. Also better power efficiency.
If they are needed for EHT, does HE need them?
[MP] This is for EHT. Not for HE.
Is dynamic SM power save link specific or other?
[MP] We were assuming link specific in the proposal.
What do you mean by the following sentence, can single radio STA be awake on more than one link
“To enable the MLSR operation, the non-AP MLD indicates two or more enabled links are in the awake state”
[MP] The procedure in slide 10 was an attempt to enable the proposed MLSR with minimal changes to the spec development. Since the non-AP MLD indicated to the AP MLD that it is a single-radio MLD, the AP MLD knows that the non-AP MLD can only receive frame on one link at a time. Now if the non-AP MLD indicates that it is available on two links then the AP MLD can pick either link that is available for transmission and transmit a packet that starts a frame exchange sequence.
Best wishes,
Ming Gan
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