| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
I agree with Claudio. We don’t need to define a new type of “sensing NDP” since at the end of the day we will need to decide which type(s) of existing NDP we are going to use for the I2R and R2I NDP in 11bf. Best, Cheng From: Claudio Da Silva <000015f3cbee3aeb-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
All, There will be no such a thing as a “sensing NDP” since defining a new NDP is out of scope for 11bf. (Thus, no need to “describe the sensing NDP.”) Instead, the NDP used in a WLAN sensing procedure will have to be one that is already defined,
such as VHT NDP or HE Ranging NDP (or multiple). The PDT of the “NDP format” TTT may be as simple as a single line (in Clause 11) to the effect of “NDP(s) used in a WLAN sensing procedure shall be X”, where X is/are (an) existing NDP format(s). Here is a good
example from 11az (in 11.21.6.1.3): “The ISTAs use HE Ranging NDPs for its I2R NDPs.” The definition of NDP to be used in WLAN sensing will go in Clause 11. Let me know if this is not clear. We can discuss this technical point in a future 11bf call if necessary. Claudio From: Yan Xin <0000181ed67b5ae9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks, Steve. This is a good idea. If we have a new 802.11bf Clause for the sensing amendment, NDP should be in that Clause. If 11bf is like 11az which does not have an 802.11az Clause, we need to discuss where to describe
the sensing NDP. Regards, Yan. From: Steve Shellhammer [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Yan, I would suggest that since we are not going to make any modifications to any of the NPDs, that the text regarding NDP will be in the new 802.11bf Clause and will consist of text specifying which NPD to send and referencing
the appropriate NDP subclause, which does not need to be modified. Regards, Steve From: Yan Xin <0000181ed67b5ae9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Claudio: It is good we are aligned. This is just a draft baseline document that is open for discussion on this topic. Thanks, Yan. From: Claudio Da Silva [mailto:claudiodasilva@xxxxxx]
Thanks, Yan. I believe we’re aligned. The key technical discussion the NDP TTT should lead is which NDP (HE?, EHT?, secure?…) 11bf will make use of. I don’t think we will need to write much normative test for this particular topic. Claudio From: Yan Xin <0000181ed67b5ae9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Claudio: There is no intention to modify the PHY in the sub-7 GHz bands based on the SENS PAR. The proposed subclause in draft PDT is a placeholder (within 36.3 EHT PHY) to accommodate the sensing NDP-related text (such
as the normative text). Thanks, Yan. From: Claudio Da Silva [mailto:claudiodasilva@xxxxxx]
Yan – The PAR of 11az is different from 11bf’s. The 11bf PAR limits the scope of modifications we can make to HT/VHT/HE/EHT PHYs. Such restriction is not present in 11az’s PAR. As a result, we won’t be able to define a new NDP format in 11bf (as 11az did). We will have to re-use an existing one. Claudio From: Yan Xin <Yan.Xin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Claudio: Thanks for your comment. The reason to refer the text in SENS SG PAR in the draft PDT is to locate the Subclause Sensing NDP by highlighting that 11bf is an amendment to HT, VHT and EHT in sub-7 GHz band, similar to 11az which is an
amendment of HT and VHT. In 11az, HE ranging NDP (27.3.18a HE Ranging NDP and HE TB Ranging NDP) is located in 27.3 HE PHY. I am open for the discussion. Any suggestion on where to put Subclause Sensing NDP to? Thanks, Yan. From: Claudio Da Silva [mailto:000015f3cbee3aeb-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Yan, As you reference in your document, 1bf’s PAR states that: “This amendment defines modifications to the
PHY service interface of the High Throughput (HT), Very High Throughput (VHT), High Efficiency (HE) and Extremely High Throughput (EHT) PHYs.” The EHT PHY service interface is defined in sub-clause 36.2. The modifications you propose are in 36.3. Thus, I believe they are out-of-scope. Claudio From: Yan Xin <0000181ed67b5ae9-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi TTT members for “NDP format”, hi all: Please find the attached draft frame work of the PDT document for “Sensing NDP format”. Your contributions to the PDT are welcome. Thanks, Yan. To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBF&A=1 |