Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Renlong, Thanks for your comments. I agree with you if you translate the Motion literally. However, I believe the intention of the Motion is to say that the serving AP MLD is allowed to tx DL fames to the non-AP MLD
during the time between the Req and Resp as well so if we only capture the TBD after the response, it may not be clear whether the serving AP MLD is allowed to tx DL frames to the non-AP MLD between the Req/Resp. BR, Duncan From: Renlong Zhou <zhou.renlong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Duncan, Thanks for the effort on the PDT. I have a question on the text of "37.12.3 Roaming execution procedure [M#27, 44]", The first paragraph includes: "The current AP MLD may transmit individually addressed downlink Data frames to the non-AP MLD for a period
of TBD time. The period of TBD time starts from the time the TBD Request frame is successfully transmitted." While the corresonding text in Motion 27 is as follows: "after the request/response exchange that initiates notification of the DS mapping change from the current AP MLD to the target AP MLD,The current AP MLD may deliver buffered DL data
frames for a TBD period of time." There is a clear difference in the starting point for calculating the TBD time between the PDT text and the Motion text. The starting point in the Motion is defined as sending the TBD time after the Response frame, rather than immediately after the Request frame. Thanks , Renlong
Original From: DuncanHo <00002b3e54cff3e2-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 2025年01月03日
07:01 Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT-MAC-Seamless-Roaming Dear SR TTT members, Happy New Year! Thanks Mark, Mike and Guogang for your review of the draft and all your thoughtful comments. Much appreciated! I just uploaded the R1 of the PDT
here based on all the comments I’ve received so far. Mark, I’ve addressed your comments in the attached “11-24-1881-01-011bn-PDT-mac-seamless-roaming-v5-mgr+DH” and “11-24-1881-00-00bn-pdt-mac-seamless-roaming-mgr+DH-mgr+DH”. Guogang, I’ve addressed your comments in the attached “11-24-1881-00-00bn-pdt-mac-seamless-roaming-HGG+DH”, Mike, I’ve added the “To be done” you suggested. For the sentence about notifying the DS about the DS mapping change, I’m keeping it for now since “DS mapping change” is in the Motion and it is one
of the important aspects of seamless roaming. However, I do understand that we may need to modify it or add clarifications later as we have further discussion on the SR framework and DS mapping updates. Thanks, Duncan From: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
- "The non-AP MLD may transmit Class 3 frames to the target AP MLD after receiving the TBD Response frame sent by the current
AP MLD." seems meaningless since "after" can mean a very long period and the non-AP surely will send class 3 frame after it moves under target AP. Maybe the intention is to use "when"?
[DH] The sentence specifies the EARLIEST time the non-AP MLD can transmit Class 3 frames so it seems correct to me. Are you saying some may interpret the “after” can mean a very long time (which is not specified)? That does not
seem like a natural interpretation of spec language. Note we cannot use “when” because at the time the Response frame is received, the non-AP MLD may or may not have frames to transmit immediately. It would be clearer to express this as "The non-AP MLD shall not transmit Class 3 frames to the target MLD until
it has received the TBD Response frame."
- "In addition, by this time, the DS has been notified about the update of the destination mapping for the non-AP MLD if necessary,
from the currently AP MLD to the target AP MLD."
"by the time" is confusing since the sentence above uses "may" so there can be 2 possible cases.
[DH] This sentence is a bit problematic. I’ll try to reword it in the next revision of the draft. This appears to be some kind of hidden "shall". The "shall" should be made explicit. Thanks, Mark --
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600 1 Cambridge Square, Cambridge CB4 0AE Fax: +44 1223 434601 ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk From: Duncan Ho <00002b3e54cff3e2-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Haorui, Thanks for your comments and please see my responses inline below. From: Haorui Yang(Rae) <yanghaorui0217@xxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Duncan, Thanks for the updated draft. I have the below comment: - "The non-AP MLD may transmit Class 3 frames to
the target AP MLD after receiving the TBD Response frame sent by the current AP MLD." seems meaningless since "after" can mean a very long period and the non-AP surely will send class 3 frame
after it moves under target AP. Maybe the intention is to use "when"? [DH] The sentence specifies the EARLIEST time the non-AP MLD can transmit Class 3 frames so it seems correct to me. Are you saying some may interpret
the “after” can mean a very long time (which is not specified)? That does not seem like a natural interpretation of spec language. Note we cannot use “when” because at the time the Response frame is received, the non-AP MLD may or may not have frames to transmit
immediately. - "In addition, by this time, the DS has been notified
about the update of the destination mapping for the non-AP MLD if necessary, from the currently AP MLD to the target AP MLD." "by the time" is confusing since the sentence above uses "may" so there can be 2 possible cases. [DH] This sentence is a bit problematic. I’ll try to reword it in the next revision of the draft. Thanks, Duncan BRs, Haorui Yang(Rae) China Mobile ---- Replied Message ----
Hi Duncan, Thanks for the update. I have two comments: 1) The text I added (To be done: Define the framework for seamless transition needs to be a placeholder in this contribution.) 2) I believe the following text is contentious and should not be included in this draft text at this time (pending the discussion
on framework above). "In addition, by this time, the DS has been notified
about the update of the destination mapping for the non-AP MLD if necessary, from the currently AP MLD to the target AP MLD" I would suggest that you delete it at this time. Cheers, Mike On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 11:59 PM
Duncan Ho <dho@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 |