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

[STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1



Hi Minyoung,

 

Thanks for the quick reply, especially during your weekend.

 

Per your minimizing the complexity, what is the gap between receiving all packets and receiving limited types of frames? What’s the additional complexity? It will decide if there is a need to define a limited capability.

 

regards

于健 Ross Yu

Huawei Technologies

 

发件人: Minyoung Park [mailto:mpark.ieee@xxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020525 10:09
收件人: Yujian (Ross Yu) <ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx>
抄送: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1

 

Hi Ross,

 

The way you described could be another way to look at it but our goal is to enhance the performance of  a single radio MLD which typically has at least 2x2 MIMO configuration that can transmit and receive a packet on one link at a time. Our approach was to add an extra capability to the single radio MLD so that the MLD can listen to both links simultaneously so that the AP MLD can pick any available link and start a frame exchange sequence.

 

Your question is exactly why we are calling it as enhanced single radio instead of multi-radio with limitations. We are adding an extra capability that just needs to listen to two links simultaneously and process a limited type of packets to enhance the performance of the single radio MLD instead of receiving any packets on two links like multi-radio MLD. Limiting the type of packets can minimize the complexity.

 

Thanks,

Minyoung

 

     

 

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 5:51 PM Yujian (Ross Yu) <ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

 

If the device can perform CCA and receive limited type of packets on two links simultaneously (in 1x1+1x1 mode), then it is not a single radio device to me. It is a multi-radio devices with limited capability.

 

One question here, why the device can only receive limited type of packets but not all types of packets, what’s the gap here?

 

regards

于健 Ross Yu

Huawei Technologies

 

发件人: Minyoung Park [mailto:mpark.ieee@xxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020523 0:06
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1

 

Hi Ming, Laurent,

 

Thanks for the discussion. Just adding to what Laurent described below, I want to share the response I was giving to other people who had similar questions. We define a single radio MLD as an MLD that can transmit/receive frame on one link at a time. On top of that, we are adding an extra capability to the single radio MLD that can perform CCA and receive limited type of packets on two links simultaneously.  

 

Regards,

Minyoung 

 

On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 7:39 AM Cariou, Laurent <laurent.cariou@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Ming,

Just to add that we classified such implementation in the single radio category to clarify that during data transmission phase only one radio is used (another classification could also be fine of course), but you have to make slight modifications/enhancements to a regular/current single radio implementation. 2 LOs instead of 1 for instance. But those changes come with very small complexity, compared to moving to complete dual radio.

Thanks,

Laurent

 

From: Ganming (Ming) <ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2020 7:08 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE]
答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 562r1

 

Hello Minyoung,

 

Really thanks for your response. I am not sure two LOs inside one single radio STA is a typical case, I will check it with our implementation guys internally. Does this faster switch time (tens of microseconds) come from two LOs?  

 

Best wishes

Ming Gan

 

 

发件人: Park, Minyoung [mailto:minyoung.park@xxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020521 1:47
收件人: Ganming (Ming) <
ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: 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


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