Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
A few comments inline.. From: Solomon Trainin <strainin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Rojan, Thank you for raising the question. I believe that the discussion allows a better understanding of the sensing basics.
Please see below my interpretation of the issue. I see a few differences between ranging and sensing: In the ranging
Correct
Result can belong to the exiting sounding (immediate) or the previous sounding (delayed) just like sensing
Correct. This is where ranging differs from sensing.
Measurement instant ID equivalent is carried in the dialog token of the Location Measurement Report (LMR) frame, or the corresponding SAC value in the Secure LTF IE as part of LMR. Therefore, there’s always a
‘measurement instant’ ID. In the sensing:
Correct
Correct 3. more than one result may be delivered in one report Yes, so far we allow more than one
delayed measurement results (if responder involved in more than one use cases- more than one setup ID) in the report frame
Correct
Correct. As far as I understand the result would need to be passed to the SME regardless of it being sent back to the initiator "For the case when the sensing initiator is the sensing transmitter, the reporting of sensing measurement results to the sensing initiator is optional. (motion 60)" There is the summary of my observation Ranging: The direct MAC feedback w/o SME involvement is the best suitable presentation of the ranging interaction Sensing: It is more like the spectrum management and radio measurement (see 6.3.13 Protocol layer model for spectrum management and radio measurement) The SME on the responder side is suitable to present the body responsible for the processing of the measurement results to respond with one or more report types.
It enables delivery of the results to the application for further utilization (p.5) Best regards, Solomon Trainin +972547885738 From: Rojan Chitrakar <rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. 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 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 |