Hi Yonggang,
Thank you for the comments, please see below
From: Yonggang Fang <Yonggang.Fang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2026 9:53 AM
To: Akhmetov, Dmitry <Dmitry.Akhmetov@xxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] doc 1885 revision2; lb-291-cr-pedca-part3 with 65 misc CIDs
Hi Dmitry,
Thanks for preparation and sharing.
I have comments on the CRs:
- 6559: The name of attribute “dot11PEDCARetryThreshold” is confused. Suggest change to “dot11PEDCAThresholdOfStartPEDCAAttempt”.
- 6560: Suggest change to “dot11PEDCAMaximumNumberOfConsecutiveAttempts”
[Akhmetov, Dmitry] I see not much need for this change, especially for dot11PEDCARetryThreshold, but I’m OK with this change if group is OK with it
- 6562: What is the baseline rule? It needs to add the reference (clause number) of the baseline rule.
- 6564: Please add the reference (clause number) of the rule.
[Akhmetov, Dmitry] For 6562 and 6564 – it is hard to provide a reference to the clause about with baseline behavior on incrementing QSRC in the text because P-EDCA clause do not talk about
incrementing QSRC counter at all. I can add (this is already done for 6564) the reference into resolution part…
- 6566: the sentence causes confused as it could apply for non-AP STA or AP. It needs to clarify like “…. in dot11EDCATable for non-AP STA or in dot11QAPEDCATable
for AP”
[Akhmetov, Dmitry] The text I have is like this: “ … P-EDCA STA shall update AIFSN, CWmin, and CWmax of EDCAF[AC_VO] with the values in dot11EDCATable (dot11QAPEDCATable for the AP).”
If you believe this is not clear enough, I can align the text as you suggested. Would the text below work for you?
“ Additionally, the (#11758) P-EDCA STA shall update AIFSN, CWmin, and CWmax of EDCAF[AC_VO] with the values in dot11EDCATable for non-AP STA and with the values in dot11QAPEDCATable for the
AP”.
Dmitry
Thanks
Yonggang
Thank you for your comment.
The motivation for removing PSRC and QSRC thresholds is simple:
We have PSRC threshold and dot11PEDCAConsecutiveAttempts variable defined in annex C with default value that serve the same purpose. Similar situation is with QSRC threshold.
I removed them per resolution to related CIDs.
As for the default duration value - and I agree with you on that - related CID was reassigned to Ning, so I expect him to handle it.
Hi Dmitry,
Thanks for sharing the document.
I am not sure why the default values for P-EDCA PSRC threshold and QSRC threshold has been deleted. It is not defined any where else.
I would recommend to remove the contention duration from this table and keep the 6 parameters that is defined by the paragraph below and define the default values for these parameters.
I uploaded revision 2 of the document 1885 to the server with 34 additional CIDs (65 total)
The document contain resolution for 65 miscellaneous CIDs in P-EDCA clause, it is scheduled for presentation in the coming ad hoc meeting
Please let me know your comments or questions.
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