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

Comments 374 & 375



Title: Message
Can anyone enlighten me as to what the objections to comment 374 and 375 are?
 
Looking at table 4, the size of the type fields for HT==0 and HT!=0 are clearly swapped and should be the other way around. As currently written, the text of table 4 is out of step with figures 19 and 20 and the headers end up without byte alignment or enough bits to accommodate the encoding in table 6 in packet types in generic MPDUs.
 
So I'm perplexed as to what the objection is.
 
DJ