|
Hi Alfred, and all
I received several comments yesterday, and have made the following revision to SP1.
SP1
Do you support adding the following to the SFD?
-
A Co-BF coordinating AP and a Co-BF coordinated AP may use a sequential Ack procedure to avoid Ack collision.
-
In the sequential Ack procedure,
at least the Co-BF coordinated AP shall set the Ack policy Indicator subfield of the QoS Control field in the Co-BF DL PPDU to "Block Ack".
-
Note: This applies to the Co-SR as well.
[Supporting doc: 24/2060]
And I added some Q&A in my latest contribution. If you have any questions or concerns, please check this first. Of course, I'm always available for technical discussions.
Best Regards,
Kosuke (SONY)
差出人: Aio, Kosuke (SEC) <Kosuke.Aio@xxxxxxxx>
送信: 2025 年 7 月 30 日 (水曜日) 23:28
宛先: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx>
件名: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] SP list
Hi Alfred,
Regarding my deffered SP, I had a lot of offline discussions and want to run the following two parts. Could you please add them to the JOINT agenda?
SP1
Do you support adding the following to the SFD?
-
A Co-BF coordinating AP and a Co-BF coordinated AP may use a sequential Ack procedure to avoid Ack collision.
-
In the sequential Ack procedure, the Co-BF coordinating AP and the Co-BF coordinated AP shall set the Ack policy Indicator subfield of the QoS Control field in the Co-BF DL PPDU to "Block Ack".
-
Note: This applies to the Co-SR as well.
[Supporting doc: 24/2060]
SP2
Do you support adding the following to the SFD?
[Supporting doc: 24/2060]
Best Regards,
Kosuke (SONY)
差出人: Alfred Asterjadhi <asterjadhi@xxxxxxxxx>
送信: 2025 年 7 月 28 日 (月曜日) 4:58
宛先: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
件名: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] SP list
Caution : This email originated from outside of Sony.
Do not click links or open any attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please report phishing if unsure.
Hello all,
Please review the SP list and let me know if anything is outdated or is missing:
|
May 13
|
Do you agree to enhance the existing SCS framework in 11bn to enable a non-AP STA to dynamically switch from one QoS profile to another QoS profile for an SCS stream?
·
The new QoS profile is selected from one of the previously accepted QoS profiles for that SCS stream.
TBD on mechanism for QoS profile switch indication.
Supporting document: 24/0825, 24/0660, 24/1752, 25/0494
|
Yue Qi
|
Pending
|
QoS
|
MAC
|
|
June 6
|
Do you agree to include overlapping bandwidth sounding in 11bn?
-
The relevant indications and frame exachanges are TBD.
Supporting document: ??
|
Qisheng Huang
|
Pending
|
Sounding
|
PHY
|
|
June 6
|
Do you agree to include overlapping bandwidth sounding in 11bn?
-
The overlapping bandwidth could be negotiated through exchange of invite/response frames before the transmission of UHR NDPA.
-
The sounding bandwidth announced by UHR NDPA might be less than the operating bandwidth of the UHR beamformee.
Supporting document: ??
|
Qisheng Huang
|
Pending
|
Sounding
|
PHY
|
|
June 12
|
Do you support that Co-BF and Co-SR transmission TXOP shall follow the same frame exchange sequence framework?
-
Co-SR does not need to support EHT eMLSR non-AP STA
The reference docs for all the SPs are: [24/412, 25/879]
|
Sherief Helwa
|
Pending
|
CBF/CSR
|
Joint
|
|
June 17
|
Do you agree to define a new NDP flavor (UHR NDP), that will be designated as OFDMA PPDU, thus be able to support OFDMA puncturing schemes?
Supporting document: 25/694r2
|
Avner Epstein
|
Pending
|
Sounding
|
Joint
|
|
June 17
|
Do you agree to define a UHR Sounding Operation procedure, that will be based on EHT Sounding Operation but using UHR NDP instead of EHT NDP, in order to be able to perform fresh sounding for Partial BW DL MU-MIMO?
Supporting document: 25/694r2
|
Avner Epstein
|
Pending
|
Sounding
|
Joint
|
|
July 17
|
SP1: Do you support to include additional information field(s) in the Co-TDMA ICR to what is already present in Draft 0.3 [1].
|
Klaus Doppler
|
Pending
|
CTDMA
|
MAC
|
|
July 17
|
SP2: Do you support to add an information field to the Co-TDMA ICR that the coordinated AP can use to indicate the time duration it would like to be allocated by the sharing AP as part of the Co-TDMA TXOP sharing
procedure. The sharing AP can use this information to allocate time to the coordinated AP(s). Note: The indicated time duration to be allocated is a recommendation to the sharing AP. The PDT already includes the primary AC as a parameter in the ICF to help
the polled AP to decide if it has wants to receive part of the TXOP from the sharing AP.
|
Klaus Doppler
|
Pending
|
CTDMA
|
MAC
|
|
July 17
|
SP: Do you support that:
·
A Shared (Responding) AP may reject a Co-BF/Co-SR transmission or Co-BF sounding invitation received from a Sharing (Initiating) AP.
·
In case of rejection, the Shared (Responding) AP can include the reason for rejection in the Co-BF/Co-SR Response or Co-BF Sounding Response frame.
o
Reasons for rejecting a Co-BF/Co-SR transmission or Co-BF sounding invitation are TBD.
|
Mahmoud Hasabel Naby
|
Pending
|
CBF/CSR
|
Joint
|
--
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
|