Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] 802.11 TGbh agenda for Mar 3 - NOTE TIME! Analysis of results.



Thanks, Graham.

 

No objections to also considering your approach, but …

 

I know the number of votes cast varied, which is why I used percentages and not absolute numbers.  I think that removes the difference (in my opinion).

 

The problem I have with the “assign points” method, is that, for example, something that gets a bunch of High votes gets a very high score, so a lone/few Low votes has very little relative effect.  But, something that gets a lot of Low votes is dramatically changed by a lone/few High votes.

 

However, I’ll note that it is interesting how tight a grouping you got for those “top 5” (compared to the other 4) with your method.  Interesting…

 

Mark

 

From: G Smith <gsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 3:21 PM
To: mark.hamilton2152@xxxxxxxxx; STDS-802-11-TGBH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] 802.11 TGbh agenda for Mar 3 - NOTE TIME! Analysis of results.

 

The problem with the method(s) for the analysis in 22/0405 is that the total numbers cast varies.  Also, using the Low priority as a metric, strikes me as negative. 

 

I would suggest a much simpler and clearer, positive, method is:

3 points for Hi , and 2 Points for Med

Or

2 points for Hi, and 1 point for Med

Then we get following:

 

Scheme

Name

Hi

Med

3 Hi 2 Med

2 Hi, 1 Med

Ranking

1

Signature Based

2

7

20

11

7

2

IRMA

4

8

28

16

6

3

Client ID

6

8

34

20

4

4

Transient STA ID

3

4

17

10

8

5

Secure Device ID

1

2

7

4

9

6

Opaque device ID

8

5

34

21

3

7

STA Generated Device ID

7

7

35

21

2

8

MAAD

8

6

36

22

1

9

Network Generated device ID

9

3

33

21

4

 

I would suggest from this that we could legitimately down select to effectively 4 solutions (similar to Mark’s result but I would suggest clearer to justify):

 

MAAD,

Opaque/Network Gen ID (NOTE:  I think they can be considered the same, or if not they should be)

STA Generated ID

Client ID

 

2 are STA generated IDs, and 2 are AP generated IDs. 

 

Just my observation,

 

Graham

 

 

From: Mark Hamilton [mailto:mark.hamilton2152@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 4:36 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] 802.11 TGbh agenda for Mar 3 - NOTE TIME!

 

All

 

A reminder that there is an 802.11 TGbh teleconference scheduled for Thursday, Mar 3, at 17:00 ET.

 

I have posted a proposed agenda, here: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/22/11-22-0406-00-00bh-agenda-tgbh-2022-march-3.pptx

 

Note that I have also posted an attempt at some analysis of our straw poll results from the Feb 22 teleconference, here: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/22/11-22-0405-01-00bh-solutions-straw-polls-analysis.pptx.  I am open to other thoughts on how we can analyze these results, or choose a way forward.

 

Thanks.  Mark


To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBH list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBH&A=1


To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBH list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBH&A=1