| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Naren, Unfortunately, your response does not resolve my concern Please see below Best regards, Solomon Trainin +972547885738 From: narengerile <narengerile@xxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Solomon Thank you for your comments. I understand your concern. I would like to respond as follows.
1.
Potential scenario:
A-BFT is used when a non-AP STA firstly enters the BSS (need to do SLS), or the link is lost (need to redo the SLS). AP could use the SSW/Short SSW during A-BFT to do passive sensing. [ST]
Use of the A-BFT more than one time is unlikely. Once associated, the STA has many other means to keep and redo the beam link.
2.
Practical use and benefit:
Although it seems that A-BFT may only happen once for a specific non-AP STA, it is useful since:
a)
From the perspective of the AP, it can receive transmissions for sensing in different SSW slots from multiple non-AP STAs placed in different
locations, which can be helpful especially in dense environment. [ST] The case is no different and it overburdens the AP to store information about frames received from many non-AP STAs without knowing how to process those frames.
b)
Even A-BFT may only happen once for a specific non-AP STA, it can provide a snapshot of the environment, which can be [ST] This means that this method has no value on its own and other methods are required to satisfy the use cases. Does this method provide added value to justify the
effort? In other words, I doubt that if someone implements a solution that suits the use case, would spend extra effort on such a feature.
i. used as the initial reference to select the proper STAs and/or Beams for
specific area/target
ii. combined with the follow up sensing measurement results, to do further processing
for sensing
3.
Future work in consideration:
as suggested by Assaf/Solomon/Claudio and some other group members, we will continue to think about passive sensing as a whole, e.g., not only for BTI/A-BFT, but also DTI. Since the
door for D0.1 is closing, we will continue the work after D0.1, and we may need your further help/discuss to make passive sensing more complete. [ST] I agree that this approach might make sense and I'd be happy to see a complete solution. If you have further concerns, please do let me know. I will be happy to answer them, and we could have a brief discussion, e.g., a call, for me to explain.
Many thanks,
Naren 发件人:
Solomon Trainin [mailto:strainin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Naren, I have the impression that the effort to provide the DMG passive sensing during A-BFT does not pay off. Let’s see the sequence of the passive sensing to understand why it happens.
Best regards, Solomon Trainin +972547885738 From: narengerile <0000191914038692-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Dear all This is Naren from Huawei. During the last 11bf, I’ve presented a PDT for DMG passive sensing based on A-BFT to provide further information on the contribution.
Based on the SP results, and the fact that I didn’t receive any technical question during the call, I genuinely encourage our TGbf friends
who voted no and those who still have
technical concerns to contact me and share your thoughts, which will be much appreciated. I will be more than happy to have a discussion.
If I don’t receive any technical question or concern, I will
run the SP again for the PDT, during the following 11bf call on Thursday. Many thanks, Naren 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 |