| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Nelson! Thanks for the prompt response. As you can see from my explanation, the base specification defines aSIFSTime for each PHY, even though the values are the same for all PHYs in the same frequency band. Therefore, I don't think there's any need to provide justification in the SP. I propose changing the SP1 as follows Do you agree? The IEEE 802.11bp amendment should include aSIFSTime = 10 µs in the PHY definition. Best Regards, Solomon Trainin +972547885738 From: Nelson Costa [mailto:nelson@xxxxxxxx] Hi Solomon, I think I may have caused some confusion. My question specifically asked why we were running the straw poll. I understood the SP to essentially say "we'll use the same value for SIFS that every other PHY already uses." My comments stemming from that were "If it's already defined in the baseline, why are we SPing this?" I believe, based on your comments thus far, you're trying to say "We will likely write a value for aSIFSTime in our PHY clause. I would therefore ask the group to agree that value will be written as 10 µs, similar to other PHYs." Is that correct? Cheers, Nelson. On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 9:10 AM Solomon Trainin <solomon.trainin1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBP list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1 |