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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBH] 22/1218 and 22/1329



Graham,

 

I think you are correct and making these changes will simplify the text overall.

 

The reason for the MIBs was due to the text in the existing Table 9 as well as the suggestion that the ‘activated’ MIB also
be the storage location for the actual ID.

 

That being said, and per your suggestion, the single MIB can be utilized in a similar way.  Set on a per SSID basis and with the
setting store the actual identifier as well.

 

Thank you for your kind remarks.  I’ll start making these changes both to my presentation and to the text submission.

 

 

 

Kurt Lumbatis

Distinguished Software Engineer

DOCSIS CPE R&D SW Architecture (Wi-Fi)

 

ARRIS AND RUCKUS HAVE JOINED COMMSCOPE

 

3871 Lakefield Dr, Suwanee, GA 30024 USA

Office: +01-678-473-2921

 

From: G Smith <gsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 4:58 PM
To: Lumbatis, Kurt <kurt.lumbatis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBH@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: 22/1218 and 22/1329

 

 

Hi Kurt,

Thank you for all the work on your submissions 22/1218, presented today, and 22/1329.  Certainly makes us think.

 

Looking at 22/1218, the idea, as I read it, is:

In the non-AP STA, we have two MIBs; one for  “Device ID Implemented” and one for “Device ID Activated”. 

On the first association, only if both MIBs are true does the non-AP STA indicate to the AP to allocate an ID (in msg 3).

On subsequent associations, only if both MIBs are true does the non-AP STA send an ID in msg 2.

 

A suggestion expressed at today’s meeting was that all the non-AP STA need do is set a Device ID support bit in the RSN Extension Element then the AP knows what to do or expect.  Hence, the logic is simply Device ID support bit is set to 1 if both MIBs are true.  The MIB settings are then set on an BSS/ESS basis.

 

Having said that, do we really need the “Device ID Implemented” MIB?  All that matters is that the Device ID support bit is set to 1 and the AP knows what to do/expect.  If the non-AP STA does not support Device ID the support bit would not be present.  Hence, I am convincing myself that all we need do is to set the “support bit” on a BSS/ESS basis. 

 

This would simplify the text in 22/1329.  Plus, we need to change the text in Table 9-363 – Extended Capabilities field from

The STA sets the Device ID Support field to 1 to indicate support

for Device ID indication. Otherwise, the STA sets the

Device ID field to 0.

 

To something like:

 

If MIBxxx is true, the STA sets the Device ID Support field to 1 to indicate support

for Device ID indication. Otherwise, the STA sets the

Device ID field to 0. 

 

Then in the MIBxxx description make it clear that it is set on a BSS/ESS basis. 

 

Thanks

Graham

 

 

 

 


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