1 / 12

802.11 March 2012 EC Motions

Name. Company. Address. Phone. email. bkraemer@. marvell. .com. Bruce Kraemer. Marvell. 5488 Marvell Ln. +1. -. 321. -. 4. 27. -. Santa Clara, CA . 4098. 95054. 802.11 March 2012 EC Motions. Authors:. Date: 2012-03-15. 802.11 CMMW Study group extension motion.

wilton
Download Presentation

802.11 March 2012 EC Motions

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. Name Company Address Phone email bkraemer@ marvell .com Bruce Kraemer Marvell 5488 Marvell Ln +1 - 321 - 4 27 - Santa Clara, CA 4098 95054 802.11 March 2012 EC Motions Authors: Date: 2012-03-15 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  2. 802.11 CMMWStudy group extension motion • Request the IEEE 802 LMSC to extend the 802.11 China Millimeter Wave (CMMW) Study Group. • Moved: Bruce Kraemer • Result in WG: 59,0,0 passes. Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  3. 802.11 ISD Study Group Motion • Request the IEEE 802 LMSC to extend the IEEE 802.11 Infrastructure Service Discovery (ISD) Study Group. • Moved: Bruce Kraemer • Result in WG: 61,1,0 passes Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  4. Interpretation Request – 1 See document: 11-12-0459r0 Table 7-43q – HT Operation element and section 9.13.3 Protection mechanisms for transmissions of HT PPDUs Table 7-43q defines 20MHz protection mode. In 9.13.3.1 General is explained when the HT Protection field is set to 20 MHz protection mode. However, I am missing the directions for the STA or AP what to when this mode is set in all cases.  Two paragraphs contain references to 20MHz protection mode: When the HT Protection field is set to no protection mode or 20 MHz protection mode and the Nongreenfield HT STAs Present field is set to 0, no protection is required since all HT STAs in the BSS are capable of decoding HT-mixed format and HT-greenfield format transmissions. When the HT Protection field is set to no protection mode or 20 MHz protection mode and the Nongreenfield HT STAs Present field is set to 1, HT transmissions that use the HT-greenfield format shall be protected. This protection may be established by transmitting a PPDU with the TXVECTOR FORMAT parameter set to HT_MF or any of the methods described in Table 9-8. There is no paragraph regarding transmissions of non-greenfield frames in a non-greenfield environment, specifically, do non-greenfield frames sent with 40MHz channel width need to be protected when 20 MHz protection mode is set? Or is the sentence “When the HT Protection field is not set to no protection mode or the Secondary Channel Offset field is set to SCN, a STA shall not transmit a 40 MHz HT PPDU (TXVECTOR parameter CH_BANDWIDTH set to HT_CBW40) to initiate a TXOP.”the one instructing to use protection? Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  5. Interpretation Request – expansion See document: 11-12-0459r0 There is no paragraph regarding transmissions of non-greenfield frames in a non-greenfield environment, specifically, do non-greenfield frames sent with 40MHz channel width need to be protected when 20 MHz protection mode is set? Or is the sentence “When the HT Protection field is not set to no protection mode or the Secondary Channel Offset field is set to SCN, a STA shall not transmit a 40 MHz HT PPDU (TXVECTOR parameter CH_BANDWIDTH set to HT_CBW40) to initiate a TXOP.”the one instructing to use protection? Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  6. Interpretation Response • IEEE Std 802.11n-2009 is unambiguous on this issue: • The standard defines protection mode for HT STAs in 9.13.3.1: “Transmissions of HT PPDUs, referred to as HT transmissions, are protected if there are other STAs present that cannot interpret HT transmissions correctly. “ (see first sentence) and “20 MHz protection mode indicates that 1) all detected STAs are HT, 2) the BSS is 20/40 and 3) at least one HT STA is 20 MHz only” (see 9.13.3.1, 4th paragraph). • When all STAs are HT-STAs, each STA is able to decode the HT-SIG of a 40 MHz packet. • Initiation of a TXOP is addressed in 9.13.3.1 (last paragraph). Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  7. Interpretation Request Motion • Approve the response in 11-12/0459r0 as the IEEE LMSC response to the interpretation request contained therein. • Moved: Bruce Kraemer • Result in WG: 59,0,2 Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  8. SC6 Liaison Motion Context • June 2011 UK NB proposed deletion of a large number of 8802 standards • 802 deferred resolution and took responsibility for disposition proposal • EC prepared a disposition response and submitted to SC6 in Jan 2012 • During the Feb 2012 SC6 meeting the 802 disposition letter was divided into a disposition matrix and text • The disposition matrix was unanimously approved • The text resulted in an additional resolution and 802 assignment Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  9. SC6 Resolution approved Feb 24, 2012 • Resolution 6.1.4 • SC 6 instructs its Secretariat to forward the following liaison statement to IEEE 802: • “SC6 appreciates and acknowledges IEEE 802’s proposal (6N15106) for an agreement. • SC 6 will forward an initial list of related questions from its NBs and LO to IEEE 802 by 2012-03-09 • SC 6 requests a response and a draft MoU from IEEE 802 by 2012-05-01. A second list of questions will be provided to IEEE 802 by 2012-07-01 • SC 6 requests a response and updated MoU from IEEE 802 by 2012-08-01.” • Approved unanimously Andrew Myles, Cisco

  10. The proposal that only IEEE 802 “maintain, alter and extend” ISO/IEC 8802 standards was controversial • The IEEE 802 liaison indicated that IEEE 802 would be willing to submit standards (particularly 802.1 and 802.3) to ISO/IEC under certain conditions • “…it is essential that ISO/IEC JTC1/SC6 agrees that the responsibility to maintain, alter or extend the functionality of IEEE 802 standards ratified by ISO/IEC remains solely with IEEE 802” • This condition was particularly controversial among most NBs • The main issue of contention appeared to revolve around the definition of “extend”; many NBs considered a restriction of extensions as limiting SC6’s ability to do their normal work Andrew Myles, Cisco

  11. 802 Operations Manual Reference 9.1 Procedure for Coordination with Other Standards Bodies These procedures apply to communications with other standards bodies or similar entities. 9.1.1 IEEE 802 LMSC communications • Communications from the IEEE 802 LMSC to external standards bodies shall not be released without prior approval by the Sponsor. Such approval indicates that the communication represents the position of IEEE 802 LMSC. • All communications by IEEE 802 LMSC with external standards bodies shall be issued by the IEEE 802 LMSC Chair and shall be copied to the Sponsor. Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

  12. SC6 Liaison Motion • Motion • Under clause 9.1.1 of the 802 OM, approve liaising to SC6 of the following: • Pages 52-64 of 0299r6 to SC6 as responses to the questions from SC6 in N15226 and N15227, pending review and modification by IEEE SA of the answer to the question on page 63 • The draft agreement on page 72 of 0299r6 • Paul Nikolich be given authority to make editorial changes before arranging for the liaison of the final versions of the answers and draft agreement Bruce Kraemer, Marvell

More Related