| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
| --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Reflector ---
Dear all, A previous survey (see below) asked about the prevalence of CCK in current deployments. Many thanks to all who responded, to the reflector and privately. Based on the resulting discussions, there is some support for an alternative resolution to the comment. Instead of deprecating CCK, the resolution would remove the requirement that a protection mechanism using DSSS/CCK must be used for
all transmissions if there is even one NonERP STA in the BSS. The relevant current requirements are: “An ERP STA shall invoke the use of a protection mechanism after transmission or reception of the Use_Protection bit with a value of 1 in an MMPDU to or from the BSS that the ERP STA has joined or started.” (11mf D3.0 P2477 L54) “Additionally, if any of the rates in the BSSBasicRateSet parameter of the protection mechanism frame transmitting STA’s BSS are Clause 15 (DSSS PHY specification for the 2.4 GHz band designated for ISM applications) or Clause 16 (High
rate direct sequence spread spectrum (HR/DSSS) PHY specification) rates, then the protection mechanism frames shall be sent at one of those Clause 15 (DSSS PHY specification for the 2.4 GHz band designated for ISM applications) or Clause 16 (High rate direct
sequence spread spectrum (HR/DSSS) PHY specification) basic rates.” (P2476 L56) I would like to ask the following: if you do NOT support this change, please respond to the reflector. If there are no objections, I’ll prepare a detailed motion (there would be various changes to surrounding descriptive text) and bring it up in the November meeting. Thanks, Sean From: Sean Coffey
On Behalf Of coffey@xxxxxxxx Dear all, CID 2542 in LB 295 (REVmf D3.0) proposes deprecating Clause 16, which defines the CCK 5.5 Mbps and 11 Mbps modes. This was discussed during the TGmf ad hoc meeting in Cambridge last week. Following the discussion, I would like to ask the following:
Thanks in advance for any information on this topic. Regards, Sean To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11 list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11&A=1 |