Hi Abhi,
Thanks for set-up a mail thread. See my comments bellow.
- Liwen ? need to consider a general scenario where the number of links being considered for TDLS discover/setup are greater than those with the intermediate AP (MLD).
- Response ? the intention is to keep the design simple. The LINK ID is based on the link ID assigned by the intermediate AP MLD (it serves as a common reference). Furthermore, TPK generation
requires a common trusted entity ? which will be the AP MLD’s MLD MAC address and the BSSIDs of the APs operating on the links that are being setup between the peers.
<Jay> The link number of AP MLD is possible less than the non-AP MLD in several cases, e.g. AP MLD removes several links via reconfiguration and leave one link, non-AP MLDs don’t have any chance to setup multiple TDLS connection in this
senario. If so, I don’t believe anyone could buy it. According to my understanding, AP or AP MLD just forwards some of TDLS discover and setup frames in baseline. Why combine the TDLS link number with AP MLD link number, I don’t find any necessity among them.
Thanks
Best Regards
Jay Yang
From: Abhishek Patil <appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 2022年12月1日 0:18
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion related to multi-link TDLS [doc 11-22/1796]
Hi All,
I presented doc
11-22/1796r0 (Multi-Link TDLS) during today's TGbe MAC call. There were several members in the queue who didn’t get a chance to comment.
I am initiating this email thread to trigger a discussion on the topic.
Here’s a brief description of the comments and the corresponding responses that we discuss during the call:
- Po-Kai ? need to consider channel access rules if the TDLS links form an NSTR pair.
- Response ? agree. However the group has decided (see SP result for 11-22/1586) to let implementations worry about handling such scenarios (i.e., group is of the opinion that the standard
doesn’t need to provide any guidance). It is the choice of an initiating non-AP MLD to initiate TDLS discovery/setup for links that would form an NSTR pair. Similarly it is the choice of the responding non-AP MLD to accept links that would form an NSTR pair.
If it helps, a clarification NOTE can be added which says that both peers need to honor the channel access rules as specified in 35.3.16.x if the links form an NSTR pair.
- Jason ? need to update the sentence related to inclusion of per-STA profile to exclude the link where the frame is sent.
- Response ? agree. The sentence will be updated in the next revision of the doc.
- Liwen ? need to consider a general scenario where the number of links being considered for TDLS discover/setup are greater than those with the intermediate AP (MLD).
- Response ? the intention is to keep the design simple. The LINK ID is based on the link ID assigned by the intermediate AP MLD (it serves as a common reference). Furthermore, TPK generation
requires a common trusted entity ? which will be the AP MLD’s MLD MAC address and the BSSIDs of the APs operating on the links that are being setup between the peers.
Regards,
Abhi
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