Hi Dave, 
  
It’s good to re-use TID8-15 for the new coming flow in the further. I have some question on your presentation. 
- How do you consider the EDCA ACs on TID8-15? Do you want to reuse current AC mechanisms(BE,BK,VI,VO) or create a new AC mechanisms(BE,BK,VI,VO,LLRS1,LLRS2…)? For the latter option,
 how many ACs do you want to create to map TID8-15? And what’s the new AC parameter and rules?
 - In Slide16,(simulation scenario1), what’s the meaning of “protected windows”?
  
  
  
Thanks 
  
Best Regards 
  
Jay Yang 
 
  
From: Cavalcanti, Dave <dave.cavalcanti@xxxxxxxxx>  
Sent: 2020年6月26日 5:19 
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [Suspected Marketing Mail] [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Clarifications on QoS management contribution (418r3) 
 
 
  
All, 
  
Since we were not able to cover all the questions during the discussion in MAC call earlier this week, we have uploaded a revision (418r3)
 with a few clarifications (see new slides 9, 10, 11). We have also updated the proposed SP#1 as follows: 
  
- Do you support defining a QoS mechanism so that the AP MLD and non-AP MLD can:
- Announce new QoS capabilities (for LLRS) of the MLD
 - Provide traffic stream QoS description to enable classification across the MLD
 - Use TIDs 8 - 15 to indicate a new class of QoS data streams (e.g. LLRS streams) mapped to EDCA ACs with associated QoS parameters (as defined in item 2.)
- Note: the TID values are signaled in the QoS Control field of corresponding Data frames
 - Note: if an AP is not part of an AP MLD (legacy AP), the same mechanism would be used between the AP and a non-AP STA
  
  
  
  
Additional considerations: 
- There is a need to enable differentiation for more than 2 traffic streams per access category (limitation in the current spec). For instance, voice, gaming, AV/VR, control/automation
 streams in a single device/AP will need differentiation beyond VO and VI traffic classes. See limitations in existing mechanisms in slides 9 and 10.
 - The re-use of TIDs 8 to 15 to identify traffic streams will enable the prioritization based on new metrics (e.g. latency bound, jitter, reliability) and can be dynamically mapped to
 ACs
 - HCCA, ADDTS, TSPEC provide QoS negotiation, but they are unlikely to be implemented as defined in the current spec. We propose a simplified QoS negotiation approach in the context
 of 11be that also incorporates/leverages MLO and enables traffic stream differentiation with the typical EDCA implementations.
  
  
Hopefully, this helps address some of the questions, but we welcome any further discussion. 
  
Thanks, 
  
Dave 
  
----------------------------------------------------------- 
Dave Cavalcanti, PhD 
Principal Engineer 
Wireless Communications Research, Intel Labs 
Intel Corporation 
dave.cavalcanti@xxxxxxxxx 
  
  
  
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  
 |