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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion on TPE with EIRP for CID 18183 in 23/728r1

Hi Alfred and all,

 

I’ve updated the CR to 23/728r2 based on two constructive feedbacks received offline:

  • Replaced Bandwidth Indication element with Channel Switch Wrapper element to based on CID 16666, as an MLD need transmit power limits and puncturing pattern on the new channel, both of which are already provided by the Channel Switch Wrapper element
  • Revised text in the resolution for CID 17998 to use shall instead of may because EHT Operation element and Channel Switch Wrapper element are the only two possible elements for an EHT AP to indicate puncturing pattern update

If there is no other comment/concern on the CR, I’d like to queue the SP for this CR in the joint queue.

 

Thanks

Yanjun

 

From: Yanjun Sun <yanjuns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2023 8:34 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBE] Discussion on TPE with EIRP for CID 18183 in 23/728r1

Hi folks,

 

During today’s joint session, we’ve recapped the issue, candidate solutions and prior spec text in 23/728r1 as in the highlighted summary below.

 

It’ll help the group make progress if you could share any suggestion on alternative solutions or any change to the proposed spec text in the CR.

 

Discussion for CID 18183:

Issue: for TPE indicating an EIRP, there is no normative text on how to interpret reserved values for the Maximum Transmit Power Count subfield, so the behavior of a legacy STA is unknown if any value between 4-7 is used

A picture containing text, screenshot, font, number Description automatically generated

To avoid interop issues with the legacy STAs deployed in the field, the group has discussed two options in the past:

  • Option1: Append a new subfield to the existing TPE, which is an extensible element
    • Pros: lowest overhead (1 octet only), proposed text in 22/1482r7 has been discussed
  • Option2: Carry an EHT TPE together with the legacy TPE in a Beacon frame
    • Pros: more flexibility for future expansion, not getting enough support due to larger overhead
  • Option3: any other proposal?

The text in 728r1 is copied from 22/1482r7 based on option1.

 

 

Thanks

Yanjun

 

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