Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] PDT Request

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

Hi Sebastian,

Thanks for the feedback. I agree, I don’t expect encoding below 0 dBm to be used. I have simplified the description in rev1 uploaded to mentor (https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/26/11-26-0460-01-00bp-pdt-elements.docx). Also made an editorial modification on the BW supported field.

Please let me know if there is any other feedback from the group.

Kind Regards

Ian

From: Sebastian Max <sebastian.max@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, 2 March 2026 8:16 pm
To: Ian Bajaj <ian.bajaj@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] PDT Request

Hello Ian,

Thanks for your work on the PDTs.

On https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/26/11-26-0460-00-00bp-pdt-elements.docx:

The sentences

"The Energizer Maximum Transmission Power field is encoded as a 6-bit unsigned integer. The value of 0 indicates a maximum transmission power less than or equal to -27dBm, with a 1 dB increment for every other sequential value of the field. As a result, the value of 63 indicates a maximum transmission power greater than or equal to 36 dBm.“

sound unnecessary complicated, especially the „with a 1 dB increment for every other sequential value of the field“. A similar field is the (11ax) Non-SRG OBSS PD Max Offset field, there the description is

The Non-SRG OBSS PD Max Offset field contains an unsigned integer that is added to –82 dBm to generate the value of the Non-SRG OBSS PD Max parameter.

I think the formulation should follow a similar format.