Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Rojan, First, thanks for reviewing the document. First, I would like to point out that your question has already been discussed in TGbf and that the group has approved the approach found in the PDT (figure in your email). Specifically, you can find the following statement in page 9 of
the SFD: I will let the folks who advocated for this approach jump in and discuss its technical merits. In the meanwhile, I would like to propose the following:
Thanks, Claudio From: Rojan Chitrakar rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Hi Claudio, Thanks for the hard work on this. I have a question for the circled portion below (MLME-SENSTBREPOTRQ): While I agree that setup and termination should go up to the SME, I do not understand why the SME needs to be involved in the reporting phase. Shouldn’t this be handled within the MAC? Even for delayed reporting case, I struggle to think
of a reason why the SME needs to be involved. If the SME is involved, does it mean the measurement report is prepared by the SME (and not by the MAC)? There are no such MLMEs for BF reports, and even in 11az, the feedback for FTM is handled within the MAC: Regards, Rojan From: Claudio Da Silva <000015f3cbee3aeb-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
All, I have just uploaded the baseline document for the MLME TTT, which can be found here:
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/22/11-22-0233-00-00bf-proposed-draft-text-for-mlme.docx It should be noted that the contents of this document are still being discussed by TTT. If you have any comments, send me/us a note. We will bring the document to TGbf when appropriate. Thanks, Claudio 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 |