Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignm

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

Hi Jay,

Thanks for the updates I confirm that all my suggestions have been well addressed in the latest version.

Regarding the issue of Protected dual of Public Action frame for MAPC Request/Response, I also agree with you because the baseline text just originates from PDT-MAC-MLME-for-MAPC integrated into TGbn D0.1.

Therefore, if someone wishes to raise an issue then they should do so through D0.1 comment collection process currently underway.

Regards,

Jonghoe KOO

Communications Standards Research Team, Samsung Research

Samsung Electronics

From: Jay Yang <yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 4:38 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Hi All,

Based on the comment from Tomo and Jonghoe , I separate the definition of AP ID field from AID field, and please review the latest revision in the attachment (or via the following link),

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/25/11-25-0244-01-00bn-pdt-mac-ap-id-assignment.docx

@Jonghoe ,

I almost incorporate all your changes into the attached document, many thanks. For the range of AID, I saw the AID is in [1,2007] (see 9.4.1.8), and thus the AP ID shall be in the same range to align the passed motion.

@Liwen ,

Regarding to your 1st comment, 11bn draft 0.1 has the Protected MAPC Request and MAPC Response frame (see them in Table 9-516 in P63), and this PDT is on the top of baseline, and thus we can move forward without a duplicated motion on this.

For your 2nd comment, I agree with you, but I'm hesitating to make it at this moment as the passed motion doesn't touch this point. It's a great appreciated if you could submit a CC on this, and we could address it in following CR procedure.

Welcome the futher comments and questions.

Thanks

Best Regards

Jay Yang (杨志杰)

Original

From: LiwenChu <liwen.chu@xxxxxxx>

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

Date: 2025年02月19日 00:38

Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Hi Jay,

Thanks for the contribution. I have the following comments:

1, there is no motion about protected Action frame for the action frame between two APs . The related text should be removed from the document.

2, bullet 3 in subclause 37.8.1.3.2 doesn’t consider the AID allocation under multiple BSSID .

Best Regards,

Liwen

From: Tomo Adachi <tomo .adachi @TOSHIBA.CO.JP>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 1:25 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button

Hi Jay,

Thanks for the update.

For my first comment, I’m OK with your wording under 37.8.1.3.2, but I still feel uncomfortable with the description, “the AP ID … is defined in 9.4.1.8 (AID field)”, appearing in 9.6.7.55a and 9.6.7.55b, because currently 9.4.1.8 does not define the case when the ID is assigned to an AP.

Instead of adding that case under 9.4.1.8, the other way may be to delete them in 9.6.7.55a and 9.6.7.55b as Jonghoe suggested.

Best regards,

tomo

From: yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx <yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 6:01 PM
To: adachi tomoko(足立朋子 ○ＲＤＣ□ＩＴ研○ＷＳＬ) <tomo .adachi @toshiba.co.jp>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Hi Tomo ,

Thanks for your comment, see the update PDT in the attachment according to your following three comments.

Regarding to your first comments, I refer to the writing style in the baseline "The AID and RSID assignment shall be nonconflicting and shall have the same size and valid address space (as defined in 9.4.1.8 (AID field) and 26.17.4 (AID assignment))", and do some change accordingly.

Welcome further comments.

Thanks

Best Regards

Jay Yang (杨志杰)

Original

From: TomoAdachi <tomo .adachi @TOSHIBA.CO.JP>

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

Date: 2025年02月17日 10:43

Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Hi Jay,

Thanks for this PDT.

I have some comments:

l This AP ID case needs to be added in 9.4.1.8 (AID field).

l For the 3^rd bullet under 37.8.1.3.2 AP ID assignment, the AP needs to be clarified that it is an assigning AP.
Something like, “An assigning AP shall ensure that the AP ID value is not assigned by itself or by its affiliated MLD ….”

l In the last bullet under 9.6.7.55b MAPC Response frame format, “The responder AP doesn’t assigns an AP ID to the initiator AP.” à “When an AP ID is not assigned in an MAPC Response frame.”

Best regards,

tomo

From: Jay Yang <yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 8:45 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] PDT on AP ID assignment

Hi All,

I uploaded the PDT on AP ID assignment based on the two relevant motions and 802.11bn draft0.1, welcome the further comments and questions

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/25/11-25-0244-00-00bn-pdt-mac-ap-id-assignment.docx

Thanks

Best Regards

Jay Yang (杨志杰)

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