Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Initiate the discussion of AP ID assignment

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

Hi Chun,

Thanks for your work on this CR document.

My comment is straightforward: the sentence seems too general for the AP ID assignment subclause. It would be better placed in a subclause on general behavior, and a new sentence could be added to the AP ID assignment subclause that specifically addresses the rules for AP ID assignment.

"A value that is currently assigned as an AID, AP ID or RSID to a STA shall not be assigned by the AP or by its affiliated AP MLD to any other STA"

Best,

Sanket

From: huang.chun2@xxxxxxxxxx <huang.chun2@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 11:40 PM
To: stds-802-11-tgbn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-802-11-tgbn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; arik.klein@xxxxxxxxxx <arik.klein@xxxxxxxxxx>; Giovanni Chisci <gchisci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx <ming.gan@xxxxxxxxxx>; Abhishek Patil <appatil@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; binitag@xxxxxxxxx <binitag@xxxxxxxxx>; brianh@xxxxxxxxx <brianh@xxxxxxxxx>; xiangxin.gu@xxxxxxxxxx <xiangxin.gu@xxxxxxxxxx>; luochaoming@xxxxxxxx <luochaoming@xxxxxxxx>; Sanket Kalamkar <sankal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; liwen.chu@xxxxxxx <liwen.chu@xxxxxxx>
Cc: yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx <yang.zhijie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] Initiate the discussion of AP ID assignment

WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.

Hi All

（Sorry for the mistake in the subject line of my last email.）

The document 25/1875r5 was presented in the second conference call on December 1st. There are several follow-up concerns regarding its content. If you have any further suggestions, please reply to this email.

1.CID 4139(@Abhi, @Arik, @Brian,@Giovanni);

We currently have two versions on this point, both of which seem reasonable. We would like to collect feedback on this part in order to reach a consensus.

option 1: decoupling AP ID field and AID field. (can refer to 25/1875r5)

option 2: using the AID field to carry AP ID value. (can refer to 25/1875r3)， and clarifying "The AID field is optionally included in the MAPC Common Info field of a MAPC element (see (#Ed)Figure 9-aa12(MAPC Common Info field format)) as defined in 9.4.1.8 (AID field)."

2.According to the decription of “Upon a successful transmission or reception” (@Giovanni, @Brian, @Chaoming Luo);

This kind of description is also used in the baseline, See following

—— “Upon transmission or reception of an FST Teardown frame, the initiator and responder move to the Initial state (11.31.3 (FST setup protocol)).”

——“When a TWT Teardown frame is successfully transmitted or received, the TWT agreement corresponding to the TWT Flow Identifier field, TWT requesting STA MAC address and TWT responding STA MAC address of the TWT Teardown frame shall be deleted.”

For your consideration, I don’s see any ambiguities for the following three cases, it can be more accurate for Requesting AP to know when the AP ID becomes valid or shall be released.

(#10837)Upon a successful transmission or receptionof the MAPC negotiation response that contains an AP ID field, the assignment of AP ID values included in the MAPC Negotiation Response frame and in the corresponding MAPC Negotiation Request frame is established.
If (#4151,10835) the MAPC responding AP rejects all requests in a MAPC Negotiation Request frame to establish new agreements and there are no previously existing agreements, then (#4152, 10836, 4276) when the MAPC Negotiation Response frame is successfully transmitted or received, the AP ID assignment from the MAPC requesting AP is deleted, and the MAPC responding AP does not assign an AP ID in the MAPC Negotiation Response frame.
(#4277, 4276, 5824)When a MAPC requesting AP tears down all MAPC agreements among the Co-BF, Co-SR, and Co-TDMA MAPC schemes (#7898) with a MAPC responding AP, the mutually assigned AP IDs shall be released and their values can be reassigned upon a future successful transmission or reception of the MAPC negotiation response frame.

3.AP ID values and AID values(@Sanket)

In the baseline, AP ID values and AID values share the same value pool, so the following sentences can be more accurate instead of referring just to the AP ID, because if a value has been used as an AP ID, it cannot be used as an AID value. This part can also be reflected in Note 1.

A value that is currently assigned as an AID, AP ID or RSID to a STA shall not be assigned by the AP or by its affiliated AP MLD to any other STA.

4.consider void /deleted / fails (@Xiangxin, @Giovanni, @Brian)

The word “fails” appears to be more accurate.

If (#4151) the MAPC responding AP rejects all requests in a MAPC Negotiation Request frame to establish new agreements and there are no previously existing agreements, then when the MAPC Negotiation Response frame is successfully transmitted or received, the AP ID assignment from the MAPC requesting AP fails, and the MAPC responding AP does not assign an AP ID in the MAPC Negotiation Response frame.(#4152, 10836, 10835, 4276, 10837)

5.CID 7893 (@Liwen, @Ming Gan, @Arik)

(#7893)If the AP belongs to a multiple BSSID set, the AP ID value shall be greater than 2ⁿ where n is the value carried in the MaxBSSID Indicator (n) field of the Multiple BSSID element sent by the transmitted BSSID of the AP’s multiple BSSID set. If an AP is affiliated with an AP MLD that has at least two affiliated APs where each of them is a member of a multiple BSSID set, the AP ID value assigned by any AP affiliated with that AP MLD shall be greater than 2^m, where m is the maximum value indicated by the MaxBSSID Indicator field in each of the Multiple BSSID elements corresponding to each of the APs affiliated with the AP MLD.

Best Regards,

Chun Huang

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