Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Peshal, Thanks for your questions. Please find my response inline. Regards Guogang Huang 发件人: Peshal Nayak [mailto:p.nayak@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Thanks Guogang for your hard work and for triggering this discussion thread. As I mentioned in yesterday’s call, I have two main concerns with the procedure: 1.
To leverage the procedure, the STA needs to have downlink traffic. Further, the downlink traffic load will also come into play. STAs that have a high downlink traffic load
can have more frequent downlink transmissions and thus more opportunities for making the indication in the BA.
[Guogang Huang] The proposed scheme is just a complement to the current protocol.
The AP still can still use other methods to collect the buffer report info, e.g. NFRP Trigger frame.
2.
The procedure will create an unfair bias for STAs that have downlink traffic. Such STAs may not necessarily have latency sensitive traffic. [Guogang Huang] I don’t understand why it will create an unfair bias. The proposed scheme just exploits the existing procedure. There is no any new procedure. If such STAs
have no latency sensitive traffic, then the More Data subfield is set to 0. 3.
The main goal of the procedure is to reduce the delay as indicated in the comment. Could you provide some analysis on how this kind of a procedure will reduce delay? Intuitively,
it feels this will reduce delay for STAs that have downlink traffic only which may not be so much beneficial if they don’t have latency sensitive traffic. [Gugang Huang]This indication can tell the AP when to trigger the STA’s uplink transmission. Considering the proposed scheme reuse the current More Data subfield, there is
no signaling overhead. And you may note that, although I mentioned this scheme may be more useful to reduce the delay of the latency-sensitive traffic, I don’t emphasize it in the draft text. I just say one or more pending frames. An EHT STA optionally sets the More Data subfield in individually addressed Ack and BlockAck frames to 1 to indicate that
it has one or more pending frames for an EHT AP that is the intended recipient of the Ack or BlockAck. Thanks. Peshal
From: huangguogang <huangguogang1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hi all, I’d like to initiate this thread to discuss the CR document (11-22/1043r4) which is presented in today’s TGbe MAC call. Please let me know your comments/questions. Regards Guogang Huang 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 |