Hi Jianhan, Several more comments: In general there are many instances in many documents of ‘RU/M-RU’, ‘RU and M-RU, Ru or M-RU’, perhaps we just say M-RU? 34.3.12.8: - Suggest to prefix this section with similar introductory text as in 27.3.12.8: "For ease of explanation, the operation of the interleaver is described only for the SU case...." until "...The BCC interleaver operation is specified in 21.3.10.8". Doing so would simplify the description in the rest of this section.
- "BCC is applicable for small-size RUs, MRUs and 242 tone RU with less than or equal to 4 spatial streams and modulation size less than or equal to 256 QAM" - suggest to replace with "BCC is applicable only to an RU or an MRU of size no larger than 242 tones, with number of spatial streams less than or equal to 4 and with one of the following modulations: BPSK, QPSK, 16-QAM, 64-QAM or 256-QAM"
- "BCC encoder can be used for small-size MRUs. " - redundant, can be removed.
- "A joint BCC encoder is applied to small-size MRUs."- "joint BCC" needs to be defined. If no different from a regular BCC encoding and decoding, would suggest omitting this sentence.
- "The encoded bits from the joint BCC are interleaved over the whole MRU" - again, same comment as above. If no different from regular BCC, would suggest modifying as "The BCC encoded bits are interleaved over the whole MRU".
- Need to include reference to clause 27.3.12.8 for BCC encoding of non-MRUs.
- Suggest splitting table 34-x1 into two tables: one for MCS = X (BPSK + DCM + Nss=1), and another for MCS not equal to X. Refer to both tables in text
34.3.12.10: - Paragraph 1: Replace all instances of "RU" with "RU/MRU"
- The "Note -" after Table x2 can be better clarified as follows: "For an RU or MRU that spans multiple 80M frequency subblocks, LDPC tone mapping is performed separately in each subblock on the portion of the RU/MRU falling within that subblock. The values of tone mapping parameters D_TM_l and D_(TM_DCM_l) for the portion of the RU/MRU falling within the l-th frequency subblock shall be determined as in Table x2"
- Equation (1):
- "k = 0,1, ..., N_(SD_l)-1 for a 26 ,52 ,52+26 ,106 ,106+26 ,242 ,484 ,242+484 ,and 996 tone RU in the l th subblock" is better re-written as:
"k = 0,1, ..., N_(SD_l) for the portion of an RU/MRU in the l th subblock that corresponds to 26 ,52 ,52+26 ,106 ,106+26, 242, 484, 242+484 or 996 tones " - Wherever "RU" appears alone, need to modify as "RU/MRU"
- Nss_(r,u,l) should be Nss_(r,u) since it is the same across all 80M segments
- Equation (2):
- "k = 0,1, ..., 2N_(SD_l)-1 for a 26 ,52 ,52+26 ,106 ,106+26 ,242 ,484 ,242+484 ,and 996 tone RU in the l th subblock" is better re-written as:
"k = 0,1, ..., 2N_(SD_l)-1 for the portion of an RU/MRU in the l th subblock that corresponds to 26 ,52 ,52+26 ,106 ,106+26, 242, 484, 242+484 or 996 tones " - Wherever "RU" appears alone, need to modify as "RU/MRU"
- Nss_(r,u,l) should be Nss_(r,u) since it is the same across all 80M segments
- For t(k,l) with DCM, there's a typo in the equations; both sub-equations have "k < N_(SD_l)". The second sub-equation should be for "k >= N_(SD_l)"
- Equation (3):
- Wherever "RU" appears alone, need to modify as "RU/MRU"
- Nss_(r,u,l) should be Nss_(r,u) since it is the same across all 80M segments
Thanks, Ron Thanks Jianhan. This version looks good to me. From: Jianhan Liu <jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 5:16 PM
To: Lin Yang <linyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs" Thanks Lin, Please see the latest update on segment parser that accords to your comments. Hi Jianhan, Did you see my comments that I sent to you on Sunday night (attached for your easy reference)? Thanks, Lin From: Jianhan Liu <jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 4:12 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs" Hi Xiaogang, Feng, and Ross, The segment parser draft has been updated according to your comments. You can find the updated draft from the following link: Hi Jianhan
I have one comment on the equation for the term below. Please find in the attached doc. Thanks.
∑(i=0)^(l-1) m_i
BRs,
Xiaogang.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lin Yang <linyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 1:02 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs"
Thanks Jianhan for drafting this section. Please find my comments in the attached file.
Thanks,
Lin
From: Jianhan Liu <jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 2:17 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs"
Thanks Junghoon.
I updated the doc in r2 accordingly.
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-1448-02-00be-pdt-resource-unit-interleaving-for-rus-and-multipe-rus.docx
Thanks,
Jianhan
Thanks,
Jianhan
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 2:03 PM Junghoon Suh <Junghoon.Suh@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Junghoon.Suh@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hello, Jianhan
Please, find from the attached updated PDT for the BCC Interleaver parameters.
The motions are now approved for the DCM case, and the PDT needs to be updated accordingly.
Regards
Junghoon
From: Jianhan Liu [mailto:jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:jianhanliu@xxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: September 10, 2020 9:38 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs"
Dear all,
The draft text for "PDT-Resource unit-Interleaving for RUs and aggregated RUs" has been uploaded to the server. You can access it with the following link.
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-1448-00-00be-pdt-resource-unit-interleaving-for-rus-and-multipe-rus.docx
Your comments are welcome.
Thanks,
Jianhan
________________________________
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
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
|