| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Osama, Thanks for your follow-up email. I had some offline discussions on comparative analysis between RAW and r-TWT and have added summary of analysis in the resolution for CID 6479 in
22/0326r4. Thanks, Binita From: Osama Aboul-Magd <oamagd@xxxxxxxxx> Hi Binita, Thanks for your attempt to resolve my comment, CID 6479. I couldn’t attend the teleconference where you discussed your resolution but I’d have voted no anyway. Unfortunately your resolution does not address the comment. While I am pointing to the similarity between RAW and r-TWT your resolution points to motion and TG discussion which are not the subject of my comment. The two definitions of RAW and r-TWT are given below for reference: restricted target wake time (TWT) service period:
A restricted period of time during which
certain stations (STAs) can transmit and/or receive frames as defined in 35.6 (Restricted TWT) restricted access window (RAW): A medium access interval for a group of stations
(STAs) during which a STA in the RAW group indicated by the RAW parameter set (RPS) element is allowed to contend for access to the medium. My comment questions the need for defining a new mechanism that is similar to an already existing mechanism. Both are periods of time where STA allowed to compete are limited due to different reason. Is there a room to
may be modify RAW to achieve your goal. Therefore I’d expect the resolution to be “REVISED” and you add some text highlighting the differences and similarities of RAW and r-TWT and why is the need for new mechanism with all the associated frames and IEs. You also added that RAW was defined only for S1G STAs. This is not true or one could have argued that TWT was only defined only for S1G and shouldn’t have been considered for 11ax or 11be. RAW is in the baseline and is
available for use by any amendment if it makes sense. Regards; Osama. From: Binita Gupta <000018fa53b0ef43-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Hi all, I am reaching out regarding the SP on 11-22/0326r3 in today’s TGbe call. Those who voted No/Abstain please let me know your comments/questions and hope we can discuss to resolve. Thanks, -Binita 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 |