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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] CID 15580

Hi Alfred,

 

Could you please add the following CR document into the joint queue?

24-May-2023 ET

2023

916

0

TGbe

CR for CIDs in 35.7.3 Part II

Zinan Lin (InterDigital)

20-Jun-2023 12:42:17 ET

Download

 

 

This CR document contains CID 15580.

 

Thanks,

Zinan

 

From: Zinan Lin <000019c80da359b9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2023 12:32 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] CID 15580

 

 

Ron and Mark,

 

Thanks for your response and sharing your opinions.

 

What I plan to do is to run SP in the CR document 11-23/916 regarding CID 15580 and CID 17704 (they refer to the same paragraph) and get the opinion from all group members to decide if the #1 will be removed or not.

 

Regarding to #2, there is a “shall” in the added sentence. “Shall” cannot be in the NOTE.

 

Thanks,

Zinan

 

From: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 3:54 PM
To: Ron Porat <ron.porat@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Zinan Lin <Zinan.Lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Brian Hart (brianh) (brianh@xxxxxxxxx) <brianh@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] CID 15580

 

 

Hello,

 

> On your #1 below, I also think we can forget about the VHT rules now in 11be and just get rid of this paragraph.

 

I would not delete the 622.10 para shown below, unless we have text

that ensures the condition can never happen.

 

Brian has been working on making the wording of this BF stuff consistent

across the various PHYs.  We should ensure EHT doesn't introduce

unnecessary divergence.

 

> On your #2  - not following, of course an AP will not exceed the maximum PPDU duration, why do we need to mention it?

 

I think it's worth being clear that the max PPDU duration is a constraint.

I wouldn't object to this just being a NOTE, however.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

 

--

Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN   English/Esperanto/Français

Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre       Tel: +44 1223  434600

Innovation Park, Cambridge CB4 0DS      Fax: +44 1223  434601

ROYAUME UNI                             WWW: http://www.samsung.com/uk

 

From: Ron Porat <000009a0da80e877-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, 13 June 2023 00:36
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] CID 15580

 

Hi Zinan,

 

Thanks much for working on this CID resolution.

 

On your #1 below, I also think we can forget about the VHT rules now in 11be and just get rid of this paragraph.

 

On your #2  - not following, of course an AP will not exceed the maximum PPDU duration, why do we need to mention it?

 

 

Thanks,

Ron

 

 

 

From: Zinan Lin <000019c80da359b9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 11:56 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] CID 15580

 

Hi Youhan et al,

 

Thanks for your discussions and suggestions to the resolutions of CID 15580.

 

There are some difference between your suggestions and the proposed solutions:

 

  1. I do not think we need to delete the paragraph (starting P622L10 in 802.11be D3.1). Because the similar paragraph has been existing in Rules for VHT sounding protocol sequences (REVme D3.0 10.35.5.3, P2043L4).
  2. The paragraph you suggested to add from 26.5.2.2.2 (REVme D3.0 P3862L54) does not emphasize to follow the maximum PPDU duration. That is why I made some modifications as below, i.e., “without exceeding the maximum PPDU duration” is added to the paragraph.

 

CID 15580, 17074

 

CID

Clause

P.L

Comment

Proposed Change

Resolution

15580

35.7.3

616.10

If neither the EHT compressed beamforming report information nor the EHT MU exclusive beamforming report information is included, what shall be included in this case?

Add text describing what shall be included or what shall be done in such a case.

Revised. Agree with the comment in principle.

 

Per discussions within the group, the paragraph is copied from 26.5.2.2.2 (REVme D3.0 P3862L54) and “without exceeding the maximum PPDU duration” is added.

 

TGbe editor: make change in THIS DOCUMENT with tag 15580

17074

35.7.3

616.10

"An EHT beamformee that transmits EHT compressed beamforming feedback shall include neither the EHT
compressed beamforming report information nor the EHT MU exclusive beamforming report information if
the transmission duration of the PPDU carrying the EHT compressed beamforming report information and
any EHT MU exclusive beamforming report information would exceed the maximum PPDU duration (see
Table 9-34 (Maximum data unit sizes (in octets) and durations (in microseconds)))." -- in the baseline the things that are actually frame names are capitalised

Follow baseline

Accepted

Please let me know if you have any questions/comments.

 

Copy to the 11be reflector for everyone’s knowledge about this change.

 

Thank you very much for your help with resolving this CID.

 

Best regards,

Zinan

 

 

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