Hi all,
I consulted with Graham who did the initial work for this comment. Here is the summary of my analysis:
Similar comments have been considered in past ballots:
CID 326:
REJECTED (MAC: 2017-10-06 17:12:30Z): The 802.11 definition of RTT is provided in equation 11-5, consistent with the usage in the Standard. There is no technical error.
CID 1364:
REJECTED (MAC: 2018-07-12 21:20:40Z):
The 802.11 definition of RTT is provided in equation 11-5, consistent with the usage in the Standard. There is no technical error.
CID 2641:
REJECTED (MAC: 2019-04-04 16:27:38Z): The 802.11 definition of RTT is provided in equation 11-5, consistent with the usage in the Standard. There is no technical error.
Additionally, the term RTT is widely used in the market place (e.g., some popular OS implementations refer to this quantity as RTT, Wi-Fi Alliance's Location Orientation document uses the term). A change to the 802.11 specification could introduce inconsistency and confusion.
Feedback from Ganesh:
However, we have had the same comment in the last few ballots and they were rejected for the following reasons:
(a) The term RTT as defined currently in the specification is used in at least a test plan that performs a set of interoperability tests on the Fine Timing Measurement protocol
(b) As a result of (a), most deployments use the terminology RTT synonymously with the time of flight
(c) IEEE802.1AS-2011 uses the similar terminology
Feedback from Jonathan and Roy:
Jonathon says:
Also adding Roy Want who also expressed interest in the subject.
I recall having this discussion on a REVmc comment resolution possibly from same commenter, and I can definitely sympathy with the intention.
Having said that, as Ganesh indicated the term RTT has taken root in the context of Wi-Fi/802.11 as synonymous to TOF (Time Of Flight) and that is projected to other standards using FTM as well.
So the risking of following the commenter proposed resolution is market confusion in time where FTM is trying to take market segment.
This is not a healthy thing for commercial standard.
Given “RTT” is well defined in the context of 802.11 FTM, i.e. there is nothing broken within the standard and following the commenter recommendation will not yield a better (more accurate) standard.
BTW there is also the opposite comment possibly from same commenter to change all occurrences of TOF to RTT in 11az draft, so there is also the potential for intra spec inconsistency if REVmd moves from RTT to TOF.
Bottom line, my recommendation would be to reject the comment for the reasons Ganesh identified.
Thank you Ganesh for bringing it to my attention and you Graham for all you work on digging the information out from REVmd.
Therefore I propose to reject the comment with the following reasons:
REJECTED. This comment and the proposed change is similar to comments considered in previous ballots. The 802.11 definition of RTT is provided in equation 11-5, consistent with the usage in the Standard. The term RTT as defined currently in the specification is used in at least a test plan that performs a set of interoperability tests on the Fine Timing Measurement protocol. As a result, most deployments use the terminology RTT synonymously with the time of flight. The use of the term RTT is consistent with IEEE802.1AS-2011, which uses the similar terminology.
Cheers,
Mike
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1