Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] Updated CC41 resolution sheet

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

Jay,

Thank you for checking these.

I agree with you, I missed that we now have 4 paragraphs replacing the one big one in 12.2.11. Good catch.

Further, now that I look at this again, I would suggest we put your new sentence as the first sentence (and paragraph) of those four. So we first introduce that a non-AP STA may reuse the identifier by sending to the AP, and then we break out the three ways that is done for the different situations. What do you think?

Mark

From: Yang, Zhijie (NSB - CN/Shanghai) <zhijie.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 4:52 PM
To: mark.hamilton2152@xxxxxxxxx; STDS-802-11-TGBH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] Updated CC41 resolution sheet

Hi Mark,

I have checked the proposed change in the latest spreadsheet, I guess there is an editorial issue when I read the following Editor’s instruction.

The last sentences covers the above three cases(FILS, FT, and "other cases"), which is already agreed by the group in the last plenary meeting. And thus the proposed change(last sentence) shall be put in a separated paragraph, right? If so, we need update the editor’s instruction to say “Note to Editor: This includes replacing the last sentence in a separated paragraph, and also breaking the text into three paragraphs (for FILS, FT, and "other cases").”

@Carol, What’s your opinion?

The resolution on other CIDs are correct.

Jay Yang

"When using FILS authentication, the non-AP STA sends the identifier", need to clarify the identifier here,
like the latest one received from BSS or ESS.

Technical

12.2.11

as the comments

Jay Yang

Ready for motion

11-22/1082

Revised

Make the changes shown in 11-22/1082r3 under "Proposed text". Note to Editor: This includes replacing the last sentence, and also breaking the text into three paragraphs (for FILS, FT, and "other cases").

Thanks

Best Regards

Jay Yang

From: Mark Hamilton <mark.hamilton2152@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 2022年8月3日 1:20
To: STDS-802-11-TGBH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] Updated CC41 resolution sheet

All,

I have updated and cleaned up the CC41 comment resolution spreadsheet, here: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/22/11-22-0973-06-00bh-cc41-comments-against-d0-2.xlsx

A few notes, including ones that need to be checked/confirmed by the group:

The ones that are marked in green, and say “Ready for motion” in the Status column, will be put to a motion with the resolution as recorded in the Resn Type and Resolution Text columns. At this time, no motions on teleconferences have been scheduled, so unless something changes, the plan would be to motion all of these at the September meeting. I need to coordinate with Carol (our Editor) on our process, however, and be sure we are supporting her appropriately.
The ones in yellow, with “Review” in the Status column, need some quick action before they are formally Ready for motion.
Jay/Okan, as authors of 11-22/1082, please confirm that I translated the resolutions for CIDs in that document into the actual Resolution Text, correctly.

To all, in the future, I’m going to try to do these updates in real-time on the call, so there is no chance for my error to creep in. If anyone has a concern with how I’ve captured our agreement that the 11-22/1082 were resolved, please let me know.

On CID 55, I noted that the phrase that this comment references actually occurs two times in that paragraph. I suggest we just replace them both, but I will confirm that with the group on our call next week.

The above can be quickly double-checked on the next teleconference.

Thanks, all. This is progress!

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