| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
| --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Reflector ---
Hi Steve – Thanks for you input/comments. Please see my comments in-line below. I’ll be generating an updated contribution of 11-23/0761 based my reply comments below. Please let me know if this is an acceptable way forward for you.
Regards, Joseph From: Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Joseph, Thanks so much for providing this before the IEEE meeting. I looked it over and have a few comments and one question. Regards, Steve -------------- The term “WUR On-Off Keying” is introduced but never defined. Do we need a definition or is okay to just use this term without definition since it is self-explanatory? In my opinion a definition is not necessary as WUR is a defined abbreviation that is used as a modifier of multiple “things”, many of which are defined and On-Off Keying (OOK) is a well-known term and the OOK
abbreviation is provided in the text. Hence in my opinion there no need for a definition of WUR On-Off Keying or WUR OOK as WUR is simply a description on the type of OOK we are talking about. This said, I have received another comment (not posed to the reflector)
that also requested a definition of WUR On-Off Keying. So, I am open to a definition to be added – please let me know if you would like me to create one.
In Subclause
30.3.4.1 where you suggest the following change “The last 8 samples of those 32 samples are prepended to the 32 samples generating 40 samples, representing the 2 µs duration
WUR While I agree that these two locations do discuss the use of the MC-OOK modulation technique to generate the WUR OOK signal, I think it is clearer to state that the MC-OOK modulation technique is being used to
create the WUR OOK On Symbol. Labeling the WUR OOK On Symbol an MC-OOK On Symbol will cause confusion in my view.
In Subclause 3.3.8 in one case, it says “WRU” and not “WUR”. I will update this typo – thanks for catching it. In Subclause 30.3.9.3.2 and Subclause
30.3.10.1, “MC-OOK” has been changed to “WUR OOK” when referring to the recommended cyclic shift values for different TX antennas. In this case I think we want to stick with “MC-OOK” since all the studied were done with MC-OOK for these cyclic shifts and
we do not know what will happen with a different implementation. These are just recommendations based on studies with MC-OOK so I think we should stick with the original text. The recommended cyclic shift value applies to all multi-antenna WUR OOK signal transmissions, the requirement is necessary to ensure that unintentional beamforming does not occur. As you state this was studied
as part of the MC-OOK studies, to ensure the performance when the MC-OOK modulation technique was used. However, as discussed above referring to some WUR OOK symbols as MC-OOK symbols is confusing.
I suggest we use the following modified text. Prior to these the existing sentence in 30.3.9.3.2: – we should add: “A cyclic shift should be applied to the WUR-Sync field when multi-antenna WUR OOK signals are transmitted to minimize unintentional beamforming.”
and “When MC-OOK is used to generate the WUR OOK symbols the recommended cycle sift diversity (CSD) values for the WUR-Sync field, which is constructed from 2
µs duration WUR OOK symbols, are provided in Annex AC.” Prior to these existing sentences in 30.3.10.1 – we should add: “A cyclic shift should be applied to the WUR-Data field when multi-antenna WUR OOK signals are transmitted to minimize unintentional beamforming.”
and “When MC-OOK is used to generate the WUR OOK symbols the recommended cycle sift diversity (CSD) values for the WUR-Data field with WUR LDR, which is constructed from 4
µs duration WUR OOK symbols, are provided in Annex AC.” and “When MC-OOK is used to generate the WUR OOK symbols the recommended cycle sift diversity (CSD) values for the WUR-Data field with WUR HDR, which is constructed from 2
µs duration WUR OOK symbols, are provided in Annex AC.” In Table AC-2 the caption should end with “using MC-OOK modulation” just like in Table AC-1. The same applies to Tables AC-3 and AC-4. Thanks for catching this, I will update 11-23/0761r0. From: Joseph Levy <000019588066c6b7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Reflector ---
Hi All, I have uploaded a contribution that I believe provides text to resolve the WUR MC-OOK discussions:
This contribution contains redlined text for clauses 29, 30, and appendix AC.
Please review and comment. Regards, Joseph From: M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx>
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Reflector ---
Hi Steve, Thanks. Your recollection and the minutes seem to reflect that interpretation. I know that Joseph Levy took an action to prepare a contribution and I asked him to post a link on this thread when he has it
ready so that we can get some offline review prior to the meeting. I'm hopeful that we can resolve this issue in May. Thanks, Mike On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 11:25 AM Steve Shellhammer <sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11 list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11 list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11 list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11&A=1 |