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

[STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答���: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Announcement: Motions for TGbe on Wednesday 14th of April 2021



Hi Jonghun,

 

Thanks for sharing your opinions as well as your questions. Please see my response below in-line.

 

 

 

Regards,

Yunbo

 

发件人: Jonghun Han [mailto:jong_hun.han@xxxxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2021420 8:12
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Announcement: Motions for TGbe on Wednesday 14th of April 2021

 

  Hello Yunbo,

Thanks for your work.

I have comments on your CR 11-21/0552r2.

 

0.    Basically, I support your proposal that utilizing the existing A-control for TXOP return.

[Yunbo] thanks. I am open for it. Currently, the main concern I received from other member is that it is better to use one A-control type that people will implement. While existing A-control hard to address this concern.

 

1. "Since the explicit indication and implicit indication has their own use cases and benefits, the standard can adopt both of them and the the chip vendor can choose one of them or both in implementation."

I think it would be better to mandate the A-control (ex. SRS) support if the EHT STA supports Triggered TXOP. As you mentioned, SRS is optional feature in HE spec, but I think mandating it only for the EHT STA supporting Triggered TXOP is not a big issue.

This seems to be a simple approach than having another "implicit" indication.

Could you clarify the benifit of having "implicit" indication?

[Yunbo] it depends on the groups decision. For mandate SRS, I am not sure all people can accept it, because it is designed for NSTR non-AP MLD, so for does it has some scenarios that useful for STR non-AP MLD? The main benefit for the implicit indication is that it is not rely on an optional field/element, each STA can free to implement if it wants.

 

2. Don't we need a mechanism that covers the case that the remaining allocated time is not enough for sending the frame with SRS Control subfield?

[Yunbo] I share some of my thoughts in doc 21/0061. It is a further optimization. Since it already include a lot of details in Dibakar and my CR document for the more basic functions, I didnt cover it in 21/0552. We can further discuss it whether and how to solve the issue you mentions later.

 

Best regards,

Jonghun

 

--------- Original Message ---------

Sender : Liyunbo <liyunbo@xxxxxxxxxx>

Date : 2021-04-15 11:30 (GMT+9)

Title : [STDS-802-11-TGBE] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Announcement: Motions for TGbe on Wednesday 14th of April 2021

 

Hi Alfred,

 

I sent a request for doc 21/552, and got your response. But seems it doesn’t shown in the agenda document. Would you please check?

21/552 is related to 21/268 (Dibakar), is it possible to schedule them together? I asked Dibakar, if the schedule will defer his presentation one or two meetings, he is fine for that.

 

11-21-0552-00-00be-cr-txop-return-for-triggered-su  Yunbo Li

Regards,

Yunbo

 

发件人: Alfred Asterjadhi [mailto:asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2021413 8:40
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Announcement: Motions for TGbe on Wednesday 14th of April 2021

 

Hello all,

 

 

This is a gentle reminder on the deadline below:

 

 

 

The deadline for sending these e-mails is April 13th  2021 @10:00am ET.

 

 

 

Currently I have separated in independent motions the CID 1120 of 274r4, and PDT 490r1 as per author's requests for further discussion.

 

 

 

Regards,

 


Alfred

 

On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 7:05 PM Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

Hello all,

This is an advanced notification that TGbe will run motions during the Joint teleconference scheduled on April 14th 2021.

Please refer to the document linked below for a preliminary list of all the motions (starting from slide 33)  that will be run during the conference call:

 

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-1982-13-00be-tgbe-motions-list-for-teleconferences-part-2.pptx

 


Please review the documents included in Motions 166-172, and reply to this e-mail if you would like to identify any of these documents or any particular CID as items that need further discussion. 

 

The deadline for sending these e-mails is April 13th  2021 @10:00am ET.

 


A list of these requested items will be queued for discussion and run as a separate motion (Motions >172) during the same Joint conference call.
Contributions that have not received a request for further discussions will be part of their respective cumulative motion and will be run at the same Joint conference call. 
For more information please refer to the subclause "Guideline-Building Consensus and Populating the TGbe SFD" in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0984-04-00be-tgbe-teleconference-guidelines.docx.

 


If you have any comments and/or questions please let me know.
Best Regards,
Alfred


 

 

--

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 


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