Colleagues,
The IEEE 802.3 PAR review ad hoc teleconference met today and collected the feedback below for consideration by IEEE 802.3 participants. The ad hoc
Please send feedback or suggested changes to me by 1 pm Pacific, 6 March 2025. If none is received, I intend to submit the feedback below on behalf
of IEEE 802.3.
With regards,
-Kent
Chair, IEEE 802.3 PAR review Ad Hoc
P802.1AS - Standard - timing and Synchronization for Time-Sensitive Applications - Revision to IEEE Standard 802.1AS-2020
PAR Comments: none
P802.3dp - Amendment - Cabling Restrictions for Single Pair Power over Ethernet (SPoE)
PAR Comments: none
CSD Comments: none
P802.11br - Amendment - Enhanced Light Communications
PAR comments:
Section 5.2.b: the modification list does not include the MAC modification, which led us to believe that the MAC was not changed in the project. The text could be changed to include the MAC.
Suggest to change the introduction paragraph in 5.2.b to:
“This amendment provides enhanced light communications (ELC) for Wireless LAN operation. This amendment modifies the IEEE 802.11 MAC to support the ELC PHY and multi-link operation. The amendment introduces an ELC PHY through the modification of IEEE 802.11
sub-7.25 GHz PHYs. The modifications to the ELC PHY are limited to specifying:”
Change the last sentence of section 5.2.b to:
“This amendment provides for compatibility with legacy IEEE 802.11bb devices operating in the identified optical bands.”
Section 5.5: expand acronym “LC” in the fourth sentence. Also the stakeholder statement is confusing and implies that the stakeholders may be end users. Suggest to use the stakeholder statement from the CSD document.
Section 7.1: how does this project relate to ITU-T G.9991 that is referenced in the CSDs?
CSD comments:
Section 1.2.1, an improvement to the last sentence in the section, (page 3, line 11) could be improved. Suggested change “lighting infrastructure has the opportunity to become an important communications infrastructure in the future.”
Section 1.2.3: Distinct Identity see the comment against the PAR regarding ITU-T G.9991 relevance.
Section 1.2.4, proven similar technology section (page 3, line 36). Referring to 802.11 as a mature technology does not imply that that LC infrastructure is mature. Are you referring to 802.11 or 802.11bb? It seems to be more appropriate to refer to
802.11b.
Section 1.2.5 Economic Feasibility, item “d”. In the second sentence, security is a broad and loaded term. Please either improve or remove the claims on security and safety.
P802.15 - Standard for Low Rate Wireless Networks - Corrigendum to IEEE Standard 802.15.4-2024
PAR comments:
Section 2.1: contains a “?” in the project title. Change to “-“ or another character.
Section 5.2.b: Please confirm that it is appropriate to reference a URL in the PAR. It is our understanding that a PAR should be a standalone document. Suggest to remove the hyperlink and summarize the proposed changes.