Hi Dibakar,
Thanks for sharing. Few questions:
1) Slide 6: Why is the TBD response frame from peer STA required? Doesn’t the subsequent Data frame suffice? Why is this different from the case of TB PPDUs?
2) Slide 6: can you elaborate the sentence “Peer STA uses the allocation
for any purpose including peer-to-peer communication.”? E.g. can the allocation be used for uplink transmissions to the AP? I think this will complicate the procedure since now the AP is unsure what to expect.
3) The contribution doesn’t address the issue of how the AP knows when to share the TXOP for the peer STAs. In fact how is the AP even aware of the existence of P2P STAs in the BSS? E.g. TDLP setup frames are transparent to the AP since
they are encapsulated in Data frames. Also, BSR reports will likely need special consideration for P2P traffic, right?
I am supportive of the use case but I think it is important to address #3 as well before we can decide whether this is really as simple as portraited.
Regards,
Rojan
From: Das, Dibakar <dibakar.das@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:20 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Clarification question on 813r0
Hi Stephane and others,
We also think that the Triggered P2P is a very useful feature for supporting P2P applications and improving the overall QoS performance of the BSS in 11be. In order to achieve this in Release 1 without significant spec additions and delaying
the timeline, we have uploaded a presentation
11-20-871r1 proposing very simple Trigger based P2P operation. Overall, our thoughts seem to be aligned with what Stephane has. The main features are following:
- Limit scope of trigger based P2P for just the cases where the peer STA is associated to triggering AP (slide 5). This is then similar to TDLS use-cases.
- To simplify AP’s channel access mechanism, allocate either the entire TXOP to a P2P STA or the rest of the TXOP to a peer STA.
Please review offline and share your views.
Regards,
Dibakar
From: BARON Stephane <Stephane.BARON@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 10:48 AM
To: Das, Dibakar <dibakar.das@xxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Clarification question on 813r0
Hi Dibakar,
I see your point, and I agree not to limit the mechanism to the cascading.
I also clarify that at least in R1, the scheduled station is associated to the AP (even if its peer is potentially outside of the BSS)
So I propose to amend my SP text as follow.
“Do you support that 11be defines a procedure for an AP to share a part of the obtained TXOP for peer-to-peer (STA-to-STA) frame exchanges by signaling an RU for P2P communication in a trigger frame, the “UL Length” field specifying
the allocated time for the peer to peer communication, and the RU being allocated to a non-AP STA associated to the AP?
Note: The trigger frame may be included in a cascading sequence.”
Best regards.
Stéphane.
From: Das, Dibakar <dibakar.das@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: jeudi 28 mai 2020 16:17
To: BARON Stephane <Stephane.BARON@xxxxxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Clarification question on 813r0
Hi Stephane,
Thank you for providing the clarification below on the cascade sequence.
At a high-level, we are supportive of this overall simplified sequence for R1 as it requires minimal change in spec while significantly improving medium efficiency and potentially reducing peak latency. Based on the discussion below though
we suggest revising the SP text to allow both cascade and non-cascade sequence.
Preferably we will like to remove reference to the Cascade sequence altogether since its more of an implementation choice at AP. We can perhaps instead focus on limiting the scope of the triggered P2P in R1 (e.g., limit only to associated
peer STA,…). What do you think ?
Regards,
Dibakar
From: BARON Stephane <Stephane.BARON@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 2:51 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Clarification question on 813r0
Hi Ross,
Thank you for your question.
I think this up to the AP to include the TF triggering with a P2P RU in a cascading sequence or not.
So yes, a simplified sequence as you mention is possible.
However, I think that including a TF for P2P transmission in a cascading sequence provides additional benefits:
-
The AP have more flexibility to share a TxOp for UL, DL, or P2P.
-
By using additional information like a “More TF” information, a P2P station can avoid immediate ack from its peer (and then save multiple SIFS overhead) if it is confident that another opportunity will come later in the same TxOp (for instance another time
slot allocated to the other peer).
-
So, to me, the TF triggering a P2P transmission can be in or out of the scope of a cascading sequence, but have more benefits in a cascading sequence.
Best regards.
Stéphane.
From: Yujian (Ross Yu) <ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: mardi 26 mai 2020 03:10
To: BARON Stephane <Stephane.BARON@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Clarification question on 813r0
Hi Stephane,
Thanks for preparing the contribution. Could you clarify if the whole (not part of) TXOP can be shared to the triggered P2P transmission or not? In other words, does it have to be combined with
MU cascading sequence in slide 4? How about a simple procedure like this?
PS: I usually attend PHY calls, so may not have the chance to ask questions after your presentation. That’s why I send the clarification question here in advance. Thanks.
regards
于健
Ross Yu
Huawei Technologies
发件人: BARON Stephane [mailto:Stephane.BARON@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2020年5月26日 2:55
收件人: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] TGbe Conf Calls [May-July 2020]: Call For Submissions
Hi Alfred,
Can you please add the following contribution to the list:
- 11-20/0813r0 : triggered p2p transmissions follow up (Stephane Baron, Canon), MAC : Medium
Access
Best regards.
Stéphane.
From: Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: dimanche 10 mai 2020 20:14
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] TGbe Conf Calls [May-July 2020]: Call For Submissions
Hello all,
This is a call for submissions for the upcoming teleconference calls meeting.
Please let me know if you have any items to be added to the agenda by sending me an e-mail with a request using the format below:
- DCN-Presentation Title (Author, Affiliation), Topic
Also please ensure that the presentation is uploaded at least one week prior to the conference call as I will include the links to the presentations in the Submission's list. If the contribution is not uploaded by that time
then it may not be included in the list.
PS - There is no need to send an additional request for contributions that are already present in the conf call queue as they will be imported by default to the Back-Logged Submission's
List.
Best Regards,
Alfred
--
Alfred Asterjadhi, PhD
IEEE802.11 TGbe Chair,
Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
Cell #: +1 858 263 9445
Office #: +1 858 658 5302
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBE&A=1