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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] request to remove passed SPs on zero user RU

Hello Jianhan, and Edward,

Seems to me the outcome of the discussion is to remove SPs 134 and 135 from the motions tomorrow and editorially amend the contents of SP136. 

Let me know if that is fine, in which case, Edward please upload another version of the compendium SPs document with the editorial improvements for SP136 and I will amend the motion by removing134 and 135, while updating the reference to the updated compendium SPs document.

Regards,

Alfred

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 4:12 PM Edward Au <edward.ks.au@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Jianhan,

An alternative is to merge #SP134, #SP135, and #SP136 as follows:

Straw poll #134

Straw poll #135

Straw poll #136

Do you802.11be agrees to add the following rows to the RU allocation table?.

·        484-tone RU; : contributes zero User fields to the User Specific field in the same EHT-SIG content channel as this RU Allocation subfield.

o   Note: multiMulti-RU case is TBD.

·        996-tone RU; : contributes zero User fields to the User Specific field in the same EHT-SIG content channel as this RU Allocation subfield.

TBD

484-tone RU; contributes zero User fields to the User Specific field in the

same EHT-SIG content channel as this RU Allocation subfield

1

TBD

996-tone RU; contributes zero User fields to the User Specific field in the

same EHT-SIG content channel as this RU Allocation subfield

1

[#SP134] [#SP135] [#SP136]

[20/1102r1 (Zero User RUs for Per-80MHz Resource Unit Allocation Signaling, Jianhan Liu, MediaTek), SP#2, Y/N/A: 39/1/1]

[20/1102r1 (Zero User RUs for Per-80MHz Resource Unit Allocation Signaling, Jianhan Liu, MediaTek), SP#1, Y/N/A: 39/0/3]

 [20/0970r1 (Multi-RU indication in RU allocation subfield, Ross Yu, Huawei), SP#1, Y/N/A: 39/1/2]


Please kindly let me know which option you prefer (i.e., I remove the text of #SP134 and #SP135, or I merge the text of #SP134 and #SP135 into #SP136), and I will inform Alfred.


Regards,
Edward


On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:43 PM Jianhan Liu <jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Edward,

I request to remove the following two SPs form the SFD since they are overlapped with SPs passed in 0970r1.

Thanks,
Jianhan

20/1102r1 (Zero User RUs for Per-80MHz Resource Unit Allocation Signaling, Jianhan Liu, MediaTek)

 

SP#1

Do you agree to add zero user RU996 to 11be RU allocation subfield?

 

Y/N/A: 39/0/3

Straw poll #134 [#SP134]


 SP#2

 Do you agree to add zero user RU484 to 11be RU allocation subfield?

·         Note: Multi-RU case is TBD

 

Y/N/A: 39/1/1

Straw poll #135 [#SP135]



--

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



--
Alfred Asterjadhi, PhD
IEEE802.11 TGbe Chair,
Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx
aasterja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cell #:    +1 858 263 9445
Office #: +1 858 658 5302

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