Dear Alfred,
I would like to kindly request a deferral of the SP for 25/0599 (28 CIDs) to June 26, since more time is needed to incorporate the received feedback. Additionally, I came to know that some interested folks are unavailable to attend the call in the week before.
FYI, the currently addressed 28 CIDs are:
148, 152, 153, 160, 161, 181, 669, 775, 1318, 1319, 1320, 1324, 1395, 1398, 1399, 1428, 1491, 1494, 1739, 1788, 1789, 2466, 3254, 3438, 3606, 3779, 3780, 3781.
Thanks,
Giovanni
From: Giovanni Chisci <00002b657bbbbed7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2025 2:03 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] TGbn Agenda: May To July Telco - Uploaded
WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi Alfred,
I would like to request a deferral for the SP for 25/0599 to have more time to take care of the remaining comments.
I expect that a good target date could be June 16 (or later).
Thanks,
Giovanni
From: Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2025 12:31 PM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] TGbn Agenda: May To July Telco - Uploaded
WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi MAC team,
Let me know if any of these other docs would benefit from further convergence/discussion, in which case i can move the SP to (possibly) next Thursday as well:
· CR/PDT SPs:
·25/0437CC D0.1 subclause 37.11 Laurent Cariou [152C SP]· 25/0538 cc50-cid-1780-discussion-on-npca-switch-back Chaoming Luo [1C SP]
· 25/0571 CR-MAC-CC50-CIDs 1550,1551 and 1553 Yajun Cheng [3C SP]
· 25/0599 PDT MAC MAPC Sig. & Protocol Aspects Giovanni Chisci [30C SP]
· 25/0448 PDT MAC on low latency indication Mohamed Abouelseoud [PDT]
I will post an updated agenda by end of today (ET) so please let me know by then.
Regards,
Alfred
On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 9:25 AM Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Michail,
Prioritization is based on the number of CIDs/resolved TBDs and as usual SPs on PDT/CRs have priority.
I don't have visibility on other aspects of the discussions, and hence I encourage members to use the reflector so that we can get a sense of how the discussions are going.
Having said that, I can move this CR to Thursday next week, and schedule SPs that are pending on a similar subject during the same Telco.
Regards,
Alfred
Alfred Asterjadhi,
IEEE802.11 TGbe/TGbn Chair,
Qualcomm Technologies Inc.
Cell #: +1 858 263 9445
Office #: +1 858 658 5302
On Fri, May 30, 2025, 9:12 AM Michail Koundourakis <m.koundou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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:
- There is no updated revision of the document, and
- There have been no discussion about this document in the reflector, and
- 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
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
--
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
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