| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hi Solomin, I have no issues with defining
Vendor Specific element, if needed, since Vendor Specific element are meant to be carried in 802.11 frames. My concern is on defining MLME primitives to control vendor specific implementations. These can be done by implementation specific
interfaces. I don’t understand why 11bp has to define interfaces between 802.11 protocol and non-802.11 protocols; if you are aware of such precedent in the 802.11 specifications, please enlighten me. Best Regards, Rojan Chitrakar From: Solomon Trainin <solomon.trainin1@xxxxxxxxx>
Hi Rojan, I want to elaborate on your concerns:
Responses
The Vendor Specific element is used to carry information not defined in this standard so that interoperability is achieved in the presence of nonstandard information. The example below shows how this element is used in an IoT hub to communicate using 802.11 protocol on one side and non-802.11 protocols on the other side (UART, BLE, Zigbee,
etc.). The general flow is as follows: 802.11 Action Frame (Vendor IE) An
IoT hub is a multi-protocol gateway that:
In this case, the hub is the
bridge that makes this work: 802.11 Action Frame (Vendor IE) An example of the products where this approach can be deployed:
These are the kinds of payloads that make sense given:
Used for Parameter Updates / Tuning What is delivered: Operational parameters
Example payload
TYPE=CONFIG
ID=sensor_123
THRESHOLD=75 INTERVAL=10 Best Regards, Solomon Trainin +972547885738 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBP list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1 |