| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
[P5] An r-TWT scheduling AP that includes a Restricted TWT Parameter Set field in a broadcast TWT element shall set the Restricted TWT Traffic Info Present subfield of the Restricted TWT Parameter Set field to 0 if the Negotiation Type subfield of the TWT element is equal to 2. (#4782)
=> "Scheduling STA" would be correct
[P6] The r-TWT scheduling AP should indicate in the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap and Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap subfields only the TIDs that are mapped to the link on which the restricted TWT membership is being set up (see 35.3.6.1 TID-to-link mapping).(#5954)
[P6] The r-TWT scheduled STA should indicate in the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap and Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap subfields only the TIDs that are mapped to the link on which the restricted TWT membership is being set up (see 35.3.6.1 TID-to-link mapping).(#5954)
=> How does Scheduled STA always know the Restricted TWT DL TID bitmap when it initiates the negotiation.
So, I suggest removing "Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap" from this sentence, Or to make it as “may” instead of “should”.
[P8] Recommendation is set to 0, 4 or 5 if transmitted by a restricted TWT scheduled STA, and otherwise is reserved if transmitted by a TWT scheduled STA.(11ax)
=> Is there any reason to allow only 0,4, and 5 ? Why don't we just remove this whole sentence, so that the scheduled STA could negotiate with all kind of traffic constraint (0~5)
[P8] (#4778, #6408)In a restricted TWT parameter set included in a TWT element in a TWT setup frame, if the Broadcast TWT Recommendation field is set to 5 and all bits in the Restricted TWT DL TID Bitmap and Restricted TWT UL TID Bitmap subfields are set to 0, the corresponding r-TWT schedule is intended to prioritize the transmission of QoS Data frames that are latency sensitive traffic between the member r-TWT scheduled STA and its peer STA(s), as described in 35.8 (Restricted TWT (r-TWT)).
=> Do we need to add this condition to decide current rTWT as p2p ? It could be non-ZERO value so that rTWT SP could serve Restricted TID traffic with Scheduling STA together with p2p traffic.
[P9] (#4778)During a trigger-enabled r-TWT SP for which the r-TWT scheduled STA sets up its membership with the Broadcast TWT Recommendation field equal to 5 ......
=> Is there any reason to apply trigger enabled rTWT only ? Need to consider non-trigger enabled rTWT as well. Otherwise, non-trigger enabled rTWT may not support TXOP Sharing with P2P.
Thank you.
/Regards, Sangho.
(Sending to the correct listserv, apologies if received twice)Hi all,Reaching out in regards to our SP regarding p2p support for r-TWT operation related CIDs in today’s meeting (21/1224r12).Those voting No/Abs please let me know your comments/questions and hope we can discuss to resolve.Thanks,Kumail.
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