1032 Ke Yao 26.3.2 75.19 "DL HE NDP is one DL make it clear Revised. HE sounding format." Change to as in means only one? Or one the resolution of of some choices? It's not CID1032 in doc clear. And what does DL HE sounding format refer to? 1613 Mark RISON 26.3.2 75.19 "DL HE NDP is one DL Delete the Accepted HE sounding format." -- sentence what does this mean? 1929 Sigurd 26.3.2 75.20 Make separate See comment Revised. Schelstraete subclause for sounding Change to as in PPDU the resolution of CID 1929 in doc 1614 Mark RISON 26.3.2 75.21 "The format of a HE Delete lines 21 Rejected. NDP PPDU is shown in to 43 inclusive Although HE Figure 26-5 (HE NDP NDP PPDU PPDU format)." -- as the transmission end of this subclause uses HE SU says, an HE NDP PPDU PPDU format is just a vanilla HE SU without Data PPDU without a Data field, it has field some specific properties such as HELTF-2x symbol format, 4μs PE duration. It is worth to put it in a separate subclause. 542 Eunsung 26.3.2 75.37 We agreed the PE for Define the PE Revised. Park NDP is 4us. extension for Change to as in NDP as 4us. the resolution of CID542 in doc 837 Jinsoo Choi 26.3.2 75.37 The duration of PE in the Change to: "The Revised. NDP PPDU was decided PE is always Change to as in as being always 4us. present and the the resolution of duration of PE is CID837 in doc 4us." 1844 Sameer 26.3.2 75.42 The text "The HE NDP Make this more Revised. Vermani PPDU has the following succinct and Change to as in properties: technically the resolution of --It uses the HE SU precise. CID 1844 in doc PPDU format but without the Data field --is an HE SU PPDU as implied by the value of L-Length field in L-SIG field" seems redundant and unclear. The first bullet says it is an PPDU format already and then second
1032 Ke Yao 26.3.2 75.19 "DL HE NDP is one DL HE sounding format." means only one? Or one of some choices? It's not clear. And what does DL HE sounding format refer to? make it clear Revised. Change to as in the resolution of CID1032 in doc 1613 Mark RISON 26.3.2 75.19 "DL HE NDP is one DL HE sounding format." -- what does this mean? Delete the sentence Accepted 1929 Sigurd Schelstraete 26.3.2 75.20 Make separate subclause for sounding PPDU See comment Revised. Change to as in the resolution of CID 1929 in doc 1614 Mark RISON 26.3.2 75.21 "The format of a HE NDP PPDU is shown in Figure 26-5 (HE NDP PPDU format)." -- as the end of this subclause says, an HE NDP PPDU is just a vanilla HE SU PPDU without a Data field Delete lines 21 to 43 inclusive Rejected. Although HE NDP PPDU transmission uses HE SU PPDU format without Data field, it has some specific properties such as HELTF-2x symbol format, 4μs PE duration. It is worth to put it in a separate subclause. 542 Eunsung Park 26.3.2 75.37 We agreed the PE for NDP is 4us. Define the PE extension for NDP as 4us. Revised. Change to as in the resolution of CID542 in doc 837 Jinsoo Choi 26.3.2 75.37 The duration of PE in the NDP PPDU was decided as being always 4us. Change to: "The PE is always present and the duration of PE is 4us." Revised. Change to as in the resolution of CID837 in doc 1844 Sameer Vermani 26.3.2 75.42 The text "The HE NDP PPDU has the following properties: --It uses the HE SU PPDU format but without the Data field --is an HE SU PPDU as implied by the value of L-Length field in L-SIG field" seems redundant and unclear. The first bullet says it is an PPDU format already and then second Make this more succinct and technically precise. Revised. Change to as in the resolution of CID 1844 in doc
11-16-0634-01-00ax-11ax-comment-resolutions-for-clauses-26-3-2.docx