| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Thanks Abhi. Actually, the problem with link-based indication shown slide 5 does not exist because the smart STA AP MLD will choose to wake up the STA on link 1 and use link 1 to retrieve the
DL traffic such that it will not miss anything. Even if the STA MLD chooses link 2, the issue is still not there. AP MLD could tell the STA MLD that there is pending traffic on link2 through link1. Moreover, AP MLD can reuse link-based indication to balance
the traffic among all the links. That means link-based indication is still useful even if it is without TID-to-Link mapping. Based on the exiting factor that is limited the number of links, the overhead is relative low. On the other hand, TID based indication can achieve almost the same function as link-based indication. However, it can not deal with management frame which is not mapped to any
TID. Moreover, I also saw some guys who cares about latency proposed to add new TID. So it is not good to have it. To reduce the overhead in the beacon, another TID mapping was proposed. However, the complexity is still there. Most important is that TID based
indication is totally not useful when TID-to-link Mapping is in default mode. Best wishes, Ming Gan 发件人: Abhishek Patil [mailto:appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi All, We ran out of time during the Q&A. I noticed there were many on the queue.
We can continue with the discussion over email. I would be happy to answer any questions on our proposal. https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/19/11-19-1955-03-00be-multi-link-operation-per-link-aid.pptx Regards, 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 |