[STDS-802-11-TGBN] 答复: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

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

Hi Jay,

Thanks for the question. As far as I understand, overhearing is one possible implementation and recommended MCS is a way to help this implementation.

Moreover, the CSI feedback can be protected or not. As far as I know, the current commercial products (not sure all but most) use unprotected version. For this case, the proposed method under this motion is helpful.

For protected case, how to improve the baseline sounding procedure can be separately discussed. And we are happy to further discuss this among the group with you.

Regards

Ross Jian Yu 于健

Huawei Technologies

发件人: Junghoon Suh <000017d35818e7c0-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
发送时间: 2025年1月15日 5:28
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

Hi, Jay

Thank you for the question.

First of all, the question you raise here is beyond the scope of the motion we run.

The motion is about how we provide the indication on the quality of the CSI feedback sent from the OBSS STA, so that the OBSS AP can overhear this CSI feedback easy.

This proposal is based on the CoBF sequential and Joint Sounding sequences we already agreed to support in the November meeting.

The security issue in overhearing the CSI feedback sent from OBSS STA is beyond the scope of this motion.

Second of all, please, discuss the resolution on any security issue you found in the CoBF Sequtial/Joint Sounding in the MAC level in case it is needed. In my opinion, the CSI feedback does not carry any secret information and anybody can overhear the CSI feedback even in the current 802.11 CSI report. I am not a security expert, but your question is beyond the scope of our motion.

We can discuss offline further before the motion.

Thank you

Regards

Junghoon Suh
Mobile: +1-6137005790
Mail: junghoon.suh@xxxxxxxxxx

From:Jay Yang <yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx>

To:STDS-802-11-TGBN <STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date:2025-01-15 05:02:49

Subject:Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

Hi Junghoon , and other PHY experts,

I understand your following SP is based on the overhear function proposed in PHY team.That's, AP2 can overhear the frame exchange between AP1 and STA1 in sounding procedure, but such function is never discussed in Joint meeting.

Could you explain how it work if the CSI feedback is encrypted by the PTK defined in 11bi? Do you mean AP1 and AP2 share the same PTK ? But we still don't reach any consensus even in roaming feature, why you thought the PTK sharing can be extended to other feature out of roaming?

Maybe the two APs belongs to different ESS , do you really want to share the STA's PTK to your neighbor AP?

Or your proposed the CSI feedback is never encrypted in UHR ?

It's great appreciated if you and any other PHY experts can explain the precondition of the overhear function first.

Thanks

Best Regards

Jay Yang (杨志杰)

Original

From: JunghoonSuh <000017d35818e7c0-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;

Date: 2025年01月14日 16:31

Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

Hello, Alfred

The following SP has passed in the PHY session in PM2 of 14 Jan (Tuesday), and please, add it to the motion list.

SP1:

Do you support including the following into the 11bn SFD ?

- 11bn defines 5 bit Recommended CSI MCS subfield in the 2nd Special STA Info field of the NDPA targeted for OBSS AP in the UHR CoBF sounding

o It is set from B20 to B24 in the 2^nd Special STA Info field

o The 5-bit MCS level includes “No Recommendation” MCS entry in addition to the UHR MCS entries

§ Index 31 indicates “No Recommendation”

o The Recommended CSI MCS is for the OBSS AP to set the MCS in the BFRP trigger frame sent in the future Cross-BSS sounding / Joint Sounding sequence

o When there are multiple OBSS STAs to feedback the CSI report, the Recommended CSI MCS can be set to the lowest MCS among all those OBSS STAs

Thank you

Regards

Junghoon Suh

From: Shimi Shilo (TRC ) [mailto:000018c72fccabed-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: January 14, 2025 3:04 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

Hi Alfred,

The following SPs passed in the PHY session, please add them to the motion list:

SP1 (Interference Mitigation)

Do you support to include the following in the 11bn SFD :

• The Interference Mitigation feature is only defined with LDPC ?

Supporting document: [24/1785r2]

[No objection]

SP3 (Interference Mitigation)

Do you support to include the following in the 11bn SFD :

• For each bandwidth, there is a fixed number of IM pilots (value TBD )?

Supporting document: [24/1785r2]

[No objection]

SP4 (Interference Mitigation)

Do you support to include the following in the 11bn SFD :

• Within any transmission that uses IM pilots, they are used in every data OFDM symbol and in the same corresponding subcarriers positions, for a given BW ?

Supporting document: [24/1785r2]

[No objection]

Thanks,

Shimi

From: Li, Qinghua <qinghua.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 3:09 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Motions

Hi Alfred,

Thanks for your timely scheduling. The SPs below got passed in PHY with no objection. Please add them to the motion list:

SP4 – Qinghua Li – UHR Stream Parser