It doesn't say "46 bits" it says "46 bits of the group address excluding the local/global and individual/group bits".
So it is ambiguous as to what happens to the other 2 bits.
I don't understand why you're resistant to using maths and prefer to
use words, but if the wording stays word-based I intend to put in a
comment in 11bi/D4.0.
Thanks,
Mark
--
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français
Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600
1 Cambridge Square, Cambridge CB4 0AE Fax: +44 1223 434601
ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk
From: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 January 2026 16:47
To: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Hi Mark,
The description says 46 bits. See below. Hence, it is not mask to 0, which will still give you 48 bits if I understand your concern.
where
group_address_46 is 46 bits of the group address excluding the local/global and individual/group bits and
where EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset is the single EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_
Offset value extracted from the BPE MHA parameter set.
Best,
Po-Kai
From: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2026 8:40 AM
To: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Hello Po-Kai,
As I said, this has potential for confusion. Does "excluding xxx bits"
mean "set them to 0" or does it mean "shift down by 2"? Using maths
has no ambiguity, because the operator is explicitly defined:
A[b:c] is the bit string consisting of bits b to c of A, where bit 0 of the output is the value of bit b
Thanks,
Mark
--
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français
Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600
1 Cambridge Square, Cambridge CB4 0AE Fax: +44 1223 434601
ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk
From: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 January 2026 16:35
To: STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Hi Mark,
There is a separate _expression_ that describes that it is 46 bits and local/global and individual/group bits are excluded. I think that addresses the confusion.
where group_address_46 is 46 bits of the group address excluding the local/global and individual/group bits and
where EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset is the single EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_
Offset value extracted from the BPE MHA parameter set.
In any case, given the multiple email exchange, I will now take CID 3072 out of the document and this CID will be reviewed using separate presentation.
For your another question, it is not part of the CID, so I will let technical expert who introduces the original language answers your question.
Best,
Po-Kai
From: Mark Rison <m.rison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2026 8:13 AM
To: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
To avoid no end of possible interop issues with confusion about endianness
and about whether the address is shifted down by 2 bits or just has 2 bits
masked out, etc. can I suggest use of the A[b:c] operator defined in
Subclause 1.4 instead? Are we saying:
—
OTAGroupAddress = (group_address[2:47] + EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset) mod 246, if
the group address is other than the broadcast address
Also, what does "single" mean in
EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset is the single EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_
Offset value extracted from the BPE MHA parameter set.
?
Thanks,
Mark
--
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français
Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600
1 Cambridge Square, Cambridge CB4 0AE Fax: +44 1223 434601
ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk
From: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, 6 January 2026 15:49
To: STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Hi Michael,
I think I get what you mean.
One option to revise is then the following
yellow. Will this work?
For BPE FA, an AP affiliated with an AP MLD shall set the Address 1 field value of a group addressed
frame to:
— OTAGroupAddress = (group_address_46
+ EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset) mod 246, if
the group address is other than the broadcast address
—
OTAGroupAddress = broadcast address, if the group address is the broadcast address
where
group_address_46 is 46 bits of the group address excluding the local/global and individual/group bits and
where EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_Offset is the single EPP_Group_Address_Anonymization_
Offset value extracted from the BPE MHA parameter set.
Best,
Po-Kai
From:
M.Grigat@xxxxxxxxxx <M.Grigat@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2026 4:38 AM
To: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>;
STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: AW: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Dear Po-Kai,
I have one comment for rejected CID 3072. Is the text description clear if the term “group address” is used twice in the sentence for different content/length of the address?
“where
group address is 46 bits of the group address excluding the local/global and individual/group bits”
BR Michael
Deutsche Telekom AG
Product & Technology
Group Technology
Dipl.-Ing. Michael Grigat
Deutsche-Telekom-Allee 9, 64295 Darmstadt
+49 6151 583-3533 (Phone)
+49 170 8561625 (Mobile)
The compulsory statement can be found here:
www.telekom.com/compulsory-statement
Von: Huang, Po-kai <po-kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2025 20:46
An: STDS-802-11-TGBI@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [STDS-802-11-TGBI] Review of some LB292 editorial comments
Hi all,
Please see the link below for the document that addresses 39 editorial CIDs (document 25/2338).
I have considered the resolutions of these editorial comments as simple editorial revision.
The intention is to review this document through reflector rather than reviewing them one by one during presentation. Please take a look and let me know if you have further comments. If you think certain comments should
be reviewed through presentation, please also let me know, and I will remove them from the document.
Thanks in advance for the review.
Best,
Po-Kai
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBI list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBI&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBI list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBI&A=1
|
|
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBI list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBI&A=1
|
|
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBI list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBI&A=1