IEEE P802.11 Wireless LANs Addressing Comment Resolutions Date: Author(s): Name Affiliation Address Phone email 170 W Tasman Dr David Kloper Cisco Systems, Inc. 408-526-5041 dakloper@cisco.com San Jose, CA 95134 CID Page Clause Comment Proposed Change Ad-hoc Notes 149 5.39 4.3.23.1 If TA=SA on a frame from an (Re)Consider this implication. Revise: three address “The AP (a BPDU, for example), is Change/limit support for three frame format may be used if it okay for the AP to set address frame format if this is SA equals TA and/or RA ToDS=1 and FromDS=0? a real concern. equals DA as described in Technically, that seems okay, 8.3.2.1 (Format of Data but do non-AP STA frames).” -> three “The implementations have "hard address frame format may be wired" rejection of "To DS" used, as defined by table 8-3, frames? Similarly, a frame provided the addresses are that passed through (but didn't consistanet with table 8-26.” orignate in) a non-AP STA, and is destined for the AP, would end up with ToDS=0 and FromDS=1. Will that confuse any AP implementations? 233 It is sloppy design to allow Recommend strongly that Revise: Changes as provided different combinations of Data selection of ToDS/FromDS be by CID149. frame ToDS/FromDS in order based on the role of the peer, to save 6 bytes in some cases. and so usage of 4Addr format This makes more sense in the be mandated when recipient(s) context of a set of low bit rate are GLK peers. WG options, and not GLK. Many other more efficient solutions are also possible under such cases, such as Van Jacobson header compression.
IEEE P802.11 Wireless LANs Addressing Comment Resolutions Date: Author(s): Name Affiliation Address Phone email David Kloper Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 W Tasman Dr San Jose, CA 95134 408-526-5041 dakloper@cisco.com CID Page Clause Comment Proposed Change Ad-hoc Notes 149 5.39 4.3.23.1 If TA=SA on a frame from an AP (a BPDU, for example), is it okay for the AP to set ToDS=1 and FromDS=0? Technically, that seems okay, but do non-AP STA implementations have "hard wired" rejection of "To DS" frames? Similarly, a frame that passed through (but didn't orignate in) a non-AP STA, and is destined for the AP, would end up with ToDS=0 and FromDS=1. Will that confuse any AP implementations? (Re)Consider this implication. Change/limit support for three address frame format if this is a real concern. Revise: “The three address frame format may be used if SA equals TA and/or RA equals DA as described in 8.3.2.1 (Format of Data frames).” -> “The three address frame format may be used, as defined by table 8-3, provided the addresses are consistanet with table 8-26.” 233 It is sloppy design to allow different combinations of Data frame ToDS/FromDS in order to save 6 bytes in some cases. This makes more sense in the context of a set of low bit rate WG options, and not GLK. Many other more efficient solutions are also possible under such cases, such as Van Jacobson header compression. Recommend strongly that selection of ToDS/FromDS be based on the role of the peer, and so usage of 4Addr format be mandated when recipient(s) are GLK peers. Revise: Changes as provided by CID149.
11-15-0795-09-00ak-addressing-comment-resolutions.docx