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

Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] [EXT] RE: SP1 in 11-26/1358r0

Hi Bo,

 

Please update SP1 per Rojan’s suggestion.

 

Best Regards,

Liwen

 


NXP Confidential

From: Liwen Chu
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2026 6:51 AM
To: 'Rojan Chitrakar' <rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Lei Huang <lei.huang1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [EXT] RE: SP1 in 11-26/1358r0

 

Hi Rojan,

 

Thanks. The update looks good to me.

 

Best Regards,

Liwen

 

From: Rojan Chitrakar <rojan.chitrakar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2026 10:44 PM
To: Liwen Chu <liwen.chu@xxxxxxx>; STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Lei Huang <lei.huang1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXT] RE: SP1 in 11-26/1358r0

 

Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button

 

Hi Liwen,

 

I was in the Queue but didn’t get chance to ask in the last call. In my opinion, the case of bistatic backscattering, and Active Tx is different and shouldn’t be mixed together in this SP for 2 reasons:

1. I assume the command here refers to UHF command, which is only motioned for mono-static.

2. For bistatic backscattering, and Active Tx, the AMP AP needs to transmit an AMP Triggering frame for every UL, non-AP AMP STAs do not directly transmit the uplink response. There are motions that state that the UL shall be within SIFS from the end of the DL AMP PPDU carrying the Trigger frame. For mono-static case, since the excitation signal protects the medium, the UL response can be delayed (more than SIFS).

 

If there is similar need for bistatic backscattering, and Active Tx, it should be discussed separately. Regarding the actual SAP to use, I think we have not concluded whether it is MAC SAP or MLME-SAP, so I suggest not to mention the SAP.

 

Suggest SP text for your consideration:

 

For mono-static backscattering, bistatic backscattering, and Active Tx, when the upper layer requests the AMP AP’s MAC layer to transmit a command to a non-AP AMP STA, a delay time of the response from the non-AP AMP STA is notified to the MAC layer by the upper layer through the AMP MAC SAP.
• The delay time excludes the SIFS and could be 0 and is not greater than the remaining TXOP duration.
• After transmitting the frame with the command, the AMP AP will wait for the delay time for receiving the responding frame.

 

Best Regards,

Rojan Chitrakar

 

From: Liwen Chu <liwen.chu@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2026 8:01 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGBP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGBP] SP1 in 11-26/1358r0

 

Hi all,

 

In last Thursday, SP1 in 11-26/1358r0 was discussed. It seems everyone agree that for the different use cases some command from the up layer needs the delayed response. There are some debates about whether the different use cases have the same MAC layer implications. Most people agreed the different use cases have the different MAC layer implications.

 

For mona-static use case, the delayed response needs to be in the same TXOP as the soliciting frame. The padding is not required since the AP needs to energize the STA during the delay time. For the other use cases, the response can be in the future TXOP and the up layer can provide another command to the MAC layer to solicit the response.

 

Best Regards,

Liwen

 

 

 

NXP Confidential

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://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBP&A=1