| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Klaus, In addition to what Dibakar wrote below: In max configuration you may signal AC, time, LLI and TSF. It is very unclear how this going to help polling STA to decide on what actions it should take. Example: AP1 send ICF saying “I’m polling AC_VO” AP2 respond back with ICR saying “I want AC_VI (ups, it cannot do that), I need 2 ms of time; I’m currently servicing LLI (what does it mean?) that actually belong to AC_VO (but I have no way of
telling you that) and my TSF for most urgent traffic XXXX.. but, ups, my urgent traffic belong to AC_BE but I have no way of telling you that as well ” AP3 respond with ICR saying “I want VO – and I can respond VO because ICF indicated VO; I need 2ms of time; I have no LLI; and my TSF ins YYYY, where YYY is “more urgent” than XXX. How this going to help ? Another, less convoluted example:
AP2 say “I need VO; I need 1ms of time; I
do not have LLI; my TSF is XXX AP3 say: “I need VO; I need 1ms of time; I
have LLI; my TSF is YYY” and YYY is “more urgent” than “XXX”. How this information going to help AP1?
Third example: AP2 say “I need VO; I need 1ms of time; I
do not have LLI; my TSF is XXX AP3 say: “I need VO; I need 1ms of time; I
have LLI; my TSF is YYY” and YYY is “more urgent” than “XXX”. AP1 finishes _current_ TXOP;
AP3 win contention , perform _usual , non-CTDMA TXOP, send its own LLI data. AP1 plan own TXOP that it is going to share it with AP3; AP1 again grab TXOP and gives APTXOP to AP3 because it thinks AP3 need to send LLI data…
How this can be prevented/avoided with that scheme ? Side question: what exactly “servicing LLI” mean? It mean a) in this shared TXOP I’ll be sending LLI data b) I have LLI stream itself c) my STAs has LLI stream with me d) I plan to send/solicit some
LLI data in a next TXOP. Yet another comment on the note that you have : NOTE—The Time Requested may be set to the time duration of a pre-planned TXOP for an AC that is the same or higher than the primary AC indicated in the ICF (see 9.3.1.22.7 Feedback User Info field,
Figure 9-114g—Feedback Information field if the Feedback Type field is set to 3) and may include both DL and UL transmissions
This a) suggest/advises particular implementation on AP side b) “may be set”…. How this note helps/explains anything if I sent to a value that is NOT pre-planned TXOP ?
Dmitry From: Das, Dibakar <dibakar.das@xxxxxxxxx>
Hi Klaus, How the expiration time and LLI sigaling work together is not clear to me. It seems redundant.
Regards, Dibakar From: Gaius Yao Huang Wee <yaohuang.wee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Klaus, Thanks for sharing the latest revision. Please see attached for some friendly (and mostly editorial) suggestions. Best regards, Gaius From: Klaus Doppler (Nokia) <0000320c1b22a542-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Everyone, 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 |