Hello Youhan,
>
If writing the exact value is the concern (because it is duplicative of Table 9-48), then I believe a more proper fix is to refer to the table rather than deleting the entire sentence.
This was my initial suggestion, but then I realised it's already
there in the immediately preceding subclause:
9.3.1.19 NDP Announcement frame format(#11be)
9.3.1.19.1 General description(#11be)
The NDP Announcement Variant subfield in the Sounding Dialog Token field identifies the NDP Announcement frame variant as defined in Table 9-48 (NDP Announcement frame variant
encoding(#11be)).
Thanks,
Mark
--
Mark RISON, Standards Architect, WLAN English/Esperanto/Français
Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre Tel: +44 1223 434600
1 Cambridge Square, Cambridge CB4 0AE Fax: +44 1223 434601
ROYAUME UNI WWW:
http://www.samsung.com/uk
From: Youhan Kim <00002b3ff331b292-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, 15 October 2026 20:24
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGM] TGmf teleconference reminder - 16 Oct 2026
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Thank you very much Mike.
Sorry but I have a few requests/feedback on the motion.
First, I would like to propose an alternate resolution to CIDs 2581 and 2417 (under Motion Oct A).
|
REVISED At REVmf D3.1 P792L11, change "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set to 2 to identify the frame as an HE NDP Announcement to "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set as defined in Table 9-48 (NDP Announcement frame variant encoding)." At REVmf D3.1 P795L24, change "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set to 1 to identify the frame as an Ranging NDP to "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set as defined in Table 9-48 (NDP Announcement frame variant encoding)." At REVmf D3.1 P798L1, change "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set to 3 to identify the frame as an EHT NDP Announcement to "The NDP Announcement Variant subfield is set as defined in Table 9-48 (NDP Announcement frame variant encoding)." |
Reason: It is still helpful for the readers to know what value should be populated in the NDP Announcement Variant subfield within the respective NDPA variant subsections. If writing the exact
value is the concern (because it is duplicative of Table 9-48), then I believe a more proper fix is to refer to the table rather than deleting the entire sentence.
Second, I would like to request to defer motion on CIDs 2485 and 2486 (Motion Oct A) as I would like to investigate the history on why we specifically called out Trigger frames that are not MU-RTS
in the cited locations.
Lastly, CIDs 2441, 2442, 2443, 2444, 2445, 4664 (Motion Oct A) seem to lack resolution (Accept/Revised/Reject) in
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/26/11-26-2018-00-000m-revmf-motion-comments-16oct26.xlsx
Thanks,
Youhan
From: M Montemurro <montemurro.michael@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2026 11:04 AM
To: STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [STDS-802-11-TGM] TGmf teleconference reminder - 16 Oct 2026
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector ---
Hello everyone,
Just wanted to send out a reminder that we will be holding a teleconference tomorrow from 10am - noon.
As announced earlier this month, we plan to run motions during the call on comment resolutions marked "Ready for Motion" between the last meeting of the September interim and the TGmf adhoc.
The agenda can be found here:
Cheers,
Mike
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGM list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGM&A=1