| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Anirud, It is my understanding that the 11n CSI report was never implemented in any products. Beamforming took off in products starting with 11ac where a totally different report approach was used focused specifically on the beamforming
matrices. A lower complexity approach to CSI formatting for the Sensing Measurement report enables a software implementation in many cases which will reduce the time-to-market for 11bf products, I would expect. I hope that answers your questions. Regards, Steve From: Sahoo, Anirudha (Fed) <anirudha.sahoo@xxxxxxxx>
Hi Steve, My apologies if this question has been asked/answered before. Why are we trying to “simplify” the CSI quantization method? The 802.11n spec based “real valued scaling” is already available in commercial products, right? If yes, then vendors have already implemented the more complex real valued scaling
based CSI reporting. If the implementation is already there and the accuracy is better than any of the proposals currently in tgbf, why simplify it? If we mandate a simpler, but less accurate method in the standard, then it would prevent vendors from implementing
more accurate (albeit more complex) method for CSI. thanks and regards -Anirud Anirudha (Anirud) Sahoo (He/Him) https://sites.google.com/view/a-sahoo National Institute of Standards and Technology Wireless Networks Division Communications Technology Lab 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 6730 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Ph: 301-975-4439 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 |