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

[802SEC] Comments on 802.15.4v PAR and 802.15.12



PAR comments:

- What are the anticipated data rates and ranges? Without the target data rates and ranges it is not possible to determine the technical feasibility of the proposed amendment. - 802.15.4 has many PHYs, will all of them be re-mapped into these bands or just specific ones.

I think the easiest thing here is to reference the PHYs in the standard that be enabled to use the indicated bands. This would resolve range and rate questions as the PHYs have already been shown to have technical feasibility for their intended ranges and rates.

I don't think the WG is intending that all 20 some PHYs are mapped into these bands.

CSD comments:

No comments


PAR comments:

5.2: The Scope references EtherType as a protocol differentiation. To be more precise and to align with IEEE 802-2014, I suggest changing "EtherType" to be "EtherType Protocol Differentiation (EPD)" and add a note to 8.1 that EPD is defined in IEEE 802-2014 (including the full name of the standard to avoid NesCom comments).

6.1.b: What registration is anticipated with regards to this proposed standards? EtherTypes already exist and so I don't see that this adds any new registration activity. When we use MAC addresses in the standard, we don't mention that there is a registration activity associated with them because it is not a new activity.

CSD comments:

General: A similar comment about using just "EtherType" which is a number and EPD, which is a function/protocol. I would suggest using EPD instead.


James Gilb

This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.  This list is maintained by Listserv.