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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] TGbn Agenda: May To July Telco - Uploaded

Hi Alfred,

 

I can see that at the top of the CR/PDT SPs, in the agenda document for June 2th there is:

    • 25/0437 CC D0.1 subclause 37.11                                 Laurent Cariou [152C SP]

 

This contribution was presented 2 times in the Warsaw F2F and SP was run (with several comments voiced and a count requested). The group did not support the proposed resolutions. I appreciate that anyone can bring an SP for as many time as they wish, but I wonder how easy it is to appear at top of the agenda again when:

  1. There is no updated revision of the document, and
  2. There have been no discussion about this document in the reflector, and
  3. There has been no willingness to discuss how to technically address a number of comments that have been explicitly pointed out to the authors, and
  4. There are many other documents that have not had their chance to be presented to the group.

 

I am not going to be able to attend the call, as it is in an unfriendly to Europe timezone, so I’d like to use this opportunity to voice my objection to the proposed resolutions. My technical concerns are:

  1. I have requested to include a different resolution for CID1751. The authors prefer to remove the CID from the SP list, and bring a separate SP without considering my technical contribution.
  2. CID241 is included in the contribution, with a “Reject” resolution. I have voiced a number of times my concern that DUO is limited to non-AP STAs, when in the real world implementations the same coexistence issues are valid and need addressing beyond non-AP STAs. I also find strange that only this one comment has been selected to go in this list (and get rejected); I am worried that it will be used later as an excuse to reject similar comments other members have made in CC50.
  3. Resolution text marked with tag [#3214] uses terms such as MaxStandaloneDuoBSRP which are not defined in this document or in D0.1/0.2, and there is no cross reference which allow me to find their meaning. So, I cannot tell if this resolution is acceptable, as I do not understand what limits it will bring to the non-AP STA’s behaviour.

 

Kind regards,

Michail

 

From: Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 28 May 2025 01:12
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] TGbn Agenda: May To July Telco - Uploaded

 

Hello all,

 

TGbn agenda for the teleconferences between May and July can be found here.

Please check that the queues reflect all submissions requests. 

 

Regards,


Alfred

 

--

Alfred Asterjadhi, PhD

IEEE802.11 TGbe/TGbn Chair,

Qualcomm Technologies Inc.

Cell #:    +1 858 263 9445

Office #: +1 858 658 5302

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1