1 / 11

Ad-Hoc Summary and Resolution of High-Priority FEC Comments

Extracted and categorized 72 FEC comments for resolution, focusing on high-priority aspects like error recovery and FEC bit positioning. Includes motions with normative text for optional FEC ACK support.

brownkyle
Download Presentation

Ad-Hoc Summary and Resolution of High-Priority FEC Comments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FEC Ad-Hoc Summary • Extracted out FEC comments from all comments, see doc 11-02-078 • 72 comments • Categorised comments for resolution • About 10 categories. • Looked at 3 high-priority comments + 2 categories • Two motions with Normative text • 11-02-077r0 – “Change 1”. • 11-02-115r0 Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  2. FEC Categories • ACK • Effectiveness • FEC Bit • FEC Capability Bit • FEC Policy • General • Interaction With Encryption • Interleaving • Length Calculation • Statistics Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  3. Priority Comments (paraphrased) • Questions effectiveness of MAC FEC when an inner code, such as found in 802.11a is present. Suggests introduction of interleaving. • Summary of discussion: • Hard data is needed. Call for input on this subject, by the March meeting. • Comment partly accepted. Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  4. Priority Comments (paraphrased) • Error recovery with FEC not defined • Summary of discussion: • Error recovery can be via ACK, or Burst ACK. • If no ACK or Burst ACK is used, the MSDU may be discarded. • But… Use of EIFS with FEC is undefined. • EIFS could be used whenever error detected using FCS • Editor may wish to clarify use of ACK/Burst ACK – Suggest the comment be made an Editorial comment. • EIFS needs normative text to clarify it use – call for. • Comment accepted. Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  5. Priority Comments (paraphrased) • FEC performance is questionable +FEC processing limits use of ACK • Summary of discussion: • Group asks commenter to read input papers give at the time which provide some justification, in particular: • 10568E – Open Issues in FEC… • 11-01/422r0 – 5Ghz support for FEC. • ACK limitation to be considered with other ACK comments (15 of) • Comment partly accepted Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  6. ACK Comments (paraphrased) • Immediate ACK with FEC is problematic • Some wish to rule out ACK with FEC. • Summary of discussion: • Don’t want to rule it out, technically it might be possible. • Proposal to make ACK with FEC optional through station capabilities. • Normative text in 11-02-077r0 proposes a change to make support of ACK with FEC optional. Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  7. Motion for Optional FEC ACK • Instruct the editor to add normative text to section 7.1.3.4 as stated in 11-02-077r0 “Change 1”. Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  8. Section 7.5 Comment • Comment made that description is inaccurately described and poorly organized. • Accepted by Ad-Hoc. • Motion to fix this… Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  9. FEC Bit Position is Problematic • Number of comments to move FEC Bit position from QOS Control field to frame control field. • Accepted by Ad-hoc. • Motion to make this move… Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  10. Motion To Fix 7.5+ Move FEC Bit Position • Instruct the editor to change normative text in section 7.5 as stated in 11-02-115r0 and update: • section 7.1 figure 13, • section 7.1.3.5 table 3.5 and • move description of FEC bit from table 3.5 and section 7.1.3.5.4 to new section 7.1.3.1.10. to make these consistent with 7.5. Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

  11. Motion to • Instruct the editor to amend the text as given by Michael Fisher as follows: “ • Move the function of the FEC bit, currently bit 9 of the QoS control field, to bit 15 of the Frame Control field, with the provision that FEC=1 is only permitted in QoS Data type frames. Restore the description of the Order bit which used to be present from 802.11-1999, with the provision that Order=1 is only permitted in non-QoS data type frames” Ivan Oakes, Tality (UK) Ltd

More Related