Hi Graham,
Thanks for your check.
I have a little concern about the '(sub)element'. According to the baseline, it(P35L22) says a device ID (sub)element, which implies element and sublement. That's the reason why i added same type of PASN ID.
I'm not sure whether this sentence wants to indicate both of FILS authen(need device ID element) and PASN authen(need device ID subelement in the PASN encrypted data element ). Maybe i missed some modification for this sentence.
Best Regards！
李炎 Li Yan
Hi Li Yan,
Great.
Attached please find r8 with a couple of very minor edits.
I added the location reference (editor instruction) at 12.2.12.1
I removed the brackets from “(sub) element” to be “subelement”
Deleted a space
I added comments so you can find them easily.
I am OK with this proposal, well done.
Graham
From: li.yan16@xxxxxxxxxx <li.yan16@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2024 10:59 PM
To: stds-802-11-tgbh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; G Smith <gsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: a minor technical issue in PASN ID contribution
Hi Graham and other members,
I'v uploaded 789r8 based on the discussion of the last meeting. Basically most are related to the editorial changes and to keep consistent with CR for CID 3122 about the length of device ID status(0 or 1).
The only technical issue is as following(i.e., use 'may' or 'shall' ):
Basically i'm not sure which one should be used, so in the previous revision i just used the word 'may'(my intention is that we can have more discussion if anyone has different idea about this). However, Graham points out it should be 'shall' and i totally agree with it.
I also want to see if other members have different opinion on this.
Additionally, cloud you please check the new revision to see if it's good for you, Graham ?🙂
Best Regards！
李炎 Li Yan
标准预研工程师 Standard Development Engineer
架构团队/有线规划部/有线产品经营部 Architecture Team/Wireline Product Planning Dept/Wireline Product Operation
ZTE Corporation,50 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District, Nanjing, P.R.China, 210012 T: +86 755 xxxxxxxx F:+86 15850568971
|
