Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Youhan and all, Please find the DCN157r3 for “PDT for Effect of CH_BANDWIDTH parameter on PPDU format” To Youhan, Most suggestion is accepted and some subclause as references are added to make it clear. One comment is as below.
For CBW320, if INACTIVE_SUNCHANNELS is not present, it should be a non-punctured non-HT PPDU of 320 MHz bandwidth.
If there are additional comments, please let me know. Regards, Yujin From: Youhan Kim
youhank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx **BE CAUTIOUS**
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE SENSCOMM. DO
NOT CLICK ANY LINKS OR OPEN ATTACHMENTS UNLESS YOU RECONGNIZE THE SENDER AND KNOW THE CONTENTS ARE SAFE. ALSO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN ‘REPLYING TO ALL’. Thanks, Yujin. That discrepancy between 26.11.7 and 27.2.5 is a good example why we should avoid duplicating information – and get it wrong. I think what you tried to convey as “non-OFDMA” and “OFDMA” is how the puncturing patterns for non-HT duplicate may be affected depending on what kind of packet sequence the non-HT duplicate PPDU is part of. PHY is oblivious to the packet
exchange sequence. Also, INACTIVE_SUBCHANNELS is a TXVECTOR which is set by MAC. So, I think it is best to leave any instructions on how to set the INACTIVE_SUBCHANNELS to clause 35. Clause 36 simply needs to understand how to transmit it. Regards, Youhan From: Yujin Noh <Yujin.Noh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of
the organization. Hi Youhan, Thank you for the suggestion. Reviewing your modification, I think I can get your points. However, there are some clarification questions.
If I missed something, please let me know. Regards, Yujin From: Youhan Kim
youhank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx **BE CAUTIOUS**
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE SENSCOMM. DO
NOT CLICK ANY LINKS OR OPEN ATTACHMENTS UNLESS YOU RECONGNIZE THE SENDER AND KNOW THE CONTENTS ARE SAFE. ALSO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN ‘REPLYING TO ALL’. Hi, Yujin. Thank you for
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/21/11-21-0157-02-00be-pdt-effect-of-ch-bandwidth-parameter-on-ppdu-format.docx. While I understand the document has passed SP last week, I find the portions related to non-HT duplicate transmission difficult to understand. For example, Table 36-x2 is purely about transmitting non-HT duplicate PPDUs, but it talks about “non-OFDMA” and “OFDMA” cases. But non-HT duplicate PPDUs have no concept of non-OFDMA and OFDMA. I suggest to
Attached document is one such implementation. Thanks. Youhan From: Yujin Noh <Yujin.Noh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of
the organization. Hi Lei, Thank you for your comment. In the uploaded version on the server, it’s been fixed as below.
I hope it could be able to reflect your intention (nonpunctured or punctured) as well. Regards, Yujin From: HUANG LEI
huang.lei1@xxxxxxxx **BE CAUTIOUS**
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE SENSCOMM. DO
NOT CLICK ANY LINKS OR OPEN ATTACHMENTS UNLESS YOU RECONGNIZE THE SENDER AND KNOW THE CONTENTS ARE SAFE. ALSO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN ‘REPLYING TO ALL’. Hi Yujin, Thanks. Attached please find my comments. Best regards, Lei From: Yujin Noh <Yujin.Noh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Alice and all, Please find the updated version.
If you have comments or concerns, please let me know. Regards, Yujin From: Yujin Noh <Yujin.Noh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
**BE CAUTIOUS**
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE SENSCOMM. DO
NOT CLICK ANY LINKS OR OPEN ATTACHMENTS UNLESS YOU RECONGNIZE THE SENDER AND KNOW THE CONTENTS ARE SAFE. ALSO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN ‘REPLYING TO ALL’. Hi Alice, That’s a good point. I will update it based on your two comments. Regards, Yujin From: Alice Jialing Li <jialing.li.phd2@xxxxxxxxx>
**BE CAUTIOUS**
THIS EMAIL ORIGINATED FROM OUTSIDE SENSCOMM. DO
NOT CLICK ANY LINKS OR OPEN ATTACHMENTS UNLESS YOU RECONGNIZE THE SENDER AND KNOW THE CONTENTS ARE SAFE. ALSO BE CAUTIOUS WHEN ‘REPLYING TO ALL’. Hi Yujin, Two comments to Table 36-x2 in the PDT: 1. For the OFDMA case, do you need to refer to the 4-bit bitmap (B3-B6 of U-SIG-1) to be more specific? 2. Is there a need to split each CBW into the nonpunctured case and punctured case? Note that the non-OFDMA case includes the nonpunctured pattern. In the next spec draft which will incorporate resolved CIDs in the U-SIG subclause, the
pattern '1111' would be added to the OFDMA case as well. So, the nonpunctured case is just a special case to the general _expression_ of the punctured pattern. Best regards, Alice Chen Qualcomm On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 12:40 PM Yujin Noh <Yujin.Noh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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
OPPO 本电子邮件及其附件含有OPPO公司的保密信息,仅限于邮件指明的收件人使用(包含个人及群组)。禁止任何人在未经授权的情况下以任何形式使用。如果您错收了本邮件,请立即以电子邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件及其附件。 This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from OPPO, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any
use of the information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify
the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it! 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 |
Attachment:
11-21-0157-03-00be-pdt-effect-of-ch-bandwidth-parameter-on-ppdu-format.docx
Description: 11-21-0157-03-00be-pdt-effect-of-ch-bandwidth-parameter-on-ppdu-format.docx