| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hello Chunyu,
Thanks for the detailed summary of the meeting.
I have a question on the way of indicating TID.
It seems that there were two (potential) candidates to specify TID(s), an implicit way and an explicit way.
I believe that the explicit way is extending the trigger frame to include target TID.
I didn't get what the implicit way is and how it is expected to operate.
Could you elaborate more about it?
Regards,
Jonghun
--------- Original Message ---------
Sender : Chunyu Hu <chunyuhu07@xxxxxxxxx>
Date : 2021-08-18 04:09 (GMT+9)
Title : Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion on rTWT SP traffic prioritization (11-21/1115,1020)
4) Q/As
Captured a few technical points at high level (not a comprehensive list): 1) is there a need to extend the trigger frame to specify a TID or TIDs in basic/BSRP? Boyce also brought up a similar question to NFRP.
Concerns were raised -- The function might be able to fulfil in an implicit way. Extending the trigger frame might be difficult / despite possible. Needs to compare implicit and explicit way. Stephane will share some slides evaluating the implicit way. Supporting point -- might be best to do it explicitly rather than depending on timing which is tricky.
Chunyu will follow up with Stephane, Boyce and let's gather proposals/analysis for further discussion (probably another call).
2) Boyce proposed to add some text clarifying on TID w/ rTWT: it's expected that a STA maps latency sensitive traffic to a TID that is likely not overlapping with latency tolerance traffic to let the overall design work better. Chunyu will follow up with Boyce on text.
3) prioritizing vs restricting: Rubayet clarified that he prefers "restricting" the rTWT SP member STA should restrict their traffic during SP to be only TIDs_L(AP, STA); if running out the traffic, then the AP or rTWT member STA should terminate the SP between them. Basically, e.g. in slide 10 of 11-21/1115r0, and put the STAs in set2 into set3, and remove set2. I brought up a situation to consider: the rTWT AP/STA may run out of DL or UL traffic only and there is still pending traffic in the other direction.
|
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