Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] Fine Timing Measurement (11-12/1249r4)

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

Hmm. I’d be inclined to use 24 (the highest, assured to be implemented, and generally seems to be reliably used, rate). But, okay, thanks for the explanation.

There’s also a difference in the number of APs used by each STA, although that is fractions of the problem.

The biggest difference is a question of how frequently STAs will do this. The really scary number in 11-13/72 comes from a 2 second rate, instead of 5 seconds.

Mark

From: Aldana, Carlos [mailto:caldana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 10:32 AM
To: Hamilton, Mark; STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Dorothy Stanley <DStanley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (DStanley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: RE: Fine Timing Measurement (11-12/1249r4)

Hi Mark,

The assumptions in 11-13/72 have a transmission data rate of ~6 mbps and my example has a data rate of 36 mbps.

Thanks

Carlos

From: Hamilton, Mark [mailto:Mark.Hamilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:04 AM
To: Aldana, Carlos; STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Dorothy Stanley <DStanley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (DStanley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: Fine Timing Measurement (11-12/1249r4)

Hi, Carlos, et al,

I see an updated 11-12/1249r4 on the server. Thanks for that – we are definitely getting closer!

One of my concerns is that your bandwidth overhead calculations have different assumptions than those in 11-13/72, with rather dramatically different results. Have the two sets of authors been able to get together and compare notes and come to some consensus on those assumptions?

Thanks. Mark

IF YOU WISH to be Removed from this reflector, PLEASE DO NOT send your request to this CLOSED reflector. We use this valuable tool to communicate on the issues at hand.