| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Giovanni, Thanks for your effort! Generally, I think the current solution makes the roaming BA too complex. Just take a look at the existing FT protocol, the renegotiation of the BA agreement
in the FT protocol is much simpler. It’s a severe degradation to divided the DL BA into three cases.
To simplify the roaming BA operation and enable the simultaneous DL reception, the spec. should allow the non-AP MLD to maintain separate BA agreement respectively with the current
AP MLD and the target AP MLD. And we should limit the common BA is applied only when the DL buffer size is not changed. If the target AP MLD wants to change DL buffer size (regardless larger or smaller), the non-AP MLD shall set the Request DL SN Not Transfer
field to 1 and the separate BA agreements are used, rather than the common BA agreement. Please find the details attached. We can have more offline discussion. Regards Guogang Huang 发件人: Giovanni Chisci <00002b657bbbbed7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[Roaming TTT - Roaming Block Ack Handling] Dear all, I presented 26/0060r0 during PM2 solving 21 CIDs for roaming Block ack handling: 4313, 4327, 5005, 5040, 5041, 6375, 6878, 6966, 6976, 7472, 7478, 7499, 9007, 9008, 9009, 10410, 11344, 12010, 12393, 12395, 12467 Please let me know if you have feedback on the text itself and on the resolution table, and I will be happy to work with you towards completing this work this week. Best, Giovanni 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 |
Attachment:
11-26-0060-00-00bn-lb291-cr-for-st-part2-HGG.docx
Description: 11-26-0060-00-00bn-lb291-cr-for-st-part2-HGG.docx