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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] PS MAC SP Set #8



Hello Rojan,

This version is fine.

Best Regards
Amichai

From: Rojan Chitrakar <rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, 27 August 2026 at 12:11
To: Amichai Sanderovich <amichai.sanderovich@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lei Huang <lei.huang1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: PS MAC SP Set #8

Hi Amichai,

 

Thanks. Based on FM-33 (see below), ACK frames are fixed size with a single ID field, so we can’t say “replace second ID field”. How about I rephrase the note as below based on your suggestion:

 

 

Ref:

 

Best Regards,

Rojan Chitrakar

 

From: Amichai Sanderovich <amichai.sanderovich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2026 4:32 PM
To: Rojan Chitrakar <rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: PS MAC SP Set #8

 

Thanks Rojan,

 

But my concern is still there.

How about the following change:

Note – another indication that can be used by the STAs to filter out AMP ACK frames from another AP is expected to replace the second ID field.

 

Best Regards

Amichai

From: Rojan Chitrakar <00002005fb56ded7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, 27 August 2026 at 10:58
To:
STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] PS MAC SP Set #8

Hi Bo,

 

Please help to update my SP#5 in PS MAC SP Set #8 by adding the note in the second bullet. I believe, the changes in the first bullet have already been updated in the last call, if not please help to update as well.

 

SP #5 (revised): Do you agree to the following?

 

Best Regards,

Rojan Chitrakar

 

From: Rojan Chitrakar <00002005fb56ded7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2026 9:56 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] PS MAC SP Set #8

 

Hi Bo,

 

Kindly help to update SP #1a of PS MAC SP Set #8 as below:

 

SP #1a:

        Field values x= 0 to 31 correspond to (x+1) = 1 to 32 octets, values x= 32 to 47 correspond to 32+2(x-31) = 34 to 64 octets, and values x= 48 to 63 correspond to 64+4(x-47) = 68 to 128 octets

        Field values x= 0 to 31 correspond to 2(x+1) = 2 to 64 octets, values x= 32 to 47 correspond to 64+4(x-31) = 68 to 128 octets, and values x= 48 to 63 correspond to 128+8(x-47) = 136 to 256 octets

 

I would also like to request to defer SP#2 and SP#3 to a later date; I am working on the corresponding PDT to give the group a sense of the spec change that may be involved to support the 2 SPs.

 

Best Regards,

Rojan Chitrakar


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


To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBP list, click the following link: https://protect.checkpoint.com/v2/r01/___https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1___.YzJ1OndpbGlvdDI6YzpvOjdlNTBmNmFmNzk5OGNjNGJlZDBiOTBjYjY4NTQwZGNlOjc6ODMzNzpiZmZlNTBiMDRiOWU0NTFlMDcxZTE5NzJiNTcyOGNlM2EwY2M0ZjlkZTQyODEwZmQyZjM4YmY4MzM4ODA3ZDVmOnQ6VDpG


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