Hi Minyoung,
Thanks for your comment. I can again try to provide the rationale that other members and I tried to explain during the call—
I agree with you that IF the same set of TIDs that are negotiated for r-TWT on a link (say Link 1) are also mapped, through TID-to-Link mapping, on another link (say, Link 2) that has an ongoing TXOP during EMLSR mode of operation,
then probably it would be OK to continue the TXOP on Link 2 during the r-TWT SP on Link 1. However, TID-to-Link mapping is a process independent of EMLSR mode, and accordingly, different sets of TIDs might be mapped on different links of EMLSR links. So, for
the case where latency-sensitive TIDs negotiated for r-TWT SP on Link 1 are not mapped on Link 2, we would need to prioritize the Link 1 for its r-TWT SP. My understanding is that EMLSR is a mode of operation instead device capability, and the fact that a
device supporting EMLSR mode will have a default mapping is not warrant, in my humble opinion.
Need for RLS Control signaling: If two r-TWT schedules are established on two links within EMLSR links, then at some point the corresponding r-TWT SPs on the two links will overlap in time. If the non-AP MLD is operating in EMLSR
mode, it cannot perform frame exchange on both links during the overlapping SPs. Through the RLS Control signaling, the non-AP MLD, before either of the overlapping SP starts, can indicate to the AP MLD the link, out of the two links, on which the non-AP MLD
intends to perform frame exchange during the corresponding r-TWT SP.
I really hope this clarifies the rationale of the EMLSR related text. Regarding the TXOP termination, I changed the text from “shall” requirement to “should” in order to make progress. If there are still some details that need to be added,
we can address those in next round, and I would be more than happy to work with you on that regard. Let’s try to make at least some progress in this round so that we can move to D2.0 with some confidence.
Best
Rubayet
From: Minyoung Park <mpark.ieee@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 6:50 PM
To: Rubayet Shafin <r.shafin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Updated Motion Deck Uploaded
Hi Rubayet,
As I commented during the call, it is better to use the link that is already exchanging frames between the AP MLD and the non-AP MLD instead of switching to the other link where the r-TWT is scheduled and start all over again. Since the
non-AP MLD is a single-radio MLD and it can use only one link at a time for frame exchanges across the EMLSR links, I don't think different TIDs will be mapped to different links (in a disjoint way). Also I don't quite understand the need for the RLS control
signaling.
I would be happy to discuss with you on these topics but I don't think we can reach consensus during this week so I'm suggesting to defer to the next round.
Hi Minyoung,
I tried to respond to your EMLSR questions during the call. Do you have any additional questions or are you not satisfied with the response? Could you kindly share your concerns?
Best
Rubayet
Hi Rubayet,
I still have concerns on the doc 254r3 regarding the text for EMLSR and r-TWT. I would suggest to defer this discussion to the next round.
Hi Alfred,
I presented document 11-22/254r3 last Thursday. Since then we have had some offline discussion with other members to discuss some issues. Could you kindly add the document in the
MAC queue for tomorrow for SP running?
Thanks you for your help.
Best
Rubayet
|
Caution: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
|
Please use this
version of the agenda. I had forgotten to add doc 11111r15 in the previous revision.
Hello all,
I uploaded a revised version of the motion deck
here.
As of now, accounting for all documents in the queues (latest version
here) and the proposed motions listed for tomorrow we should have all CIDs accounted in some document and pending resolution/discussion.
Please take a look at the agendas, and motions list and let me know if there is anything missing or if you have any suggestions for modifications/rearrangements.
--
Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
Office #: +1 858 658 5302
--
Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
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
|