7123 "requires" is a "shall", which Replace "that the PHY MAC does not appear to be intended. requires to change" with "for the PHY to change". Proposed Resolution Rejected. This comment is out of This comment is on text that is not changed in this recirculation, is not affected by other changes in this recirculation, and is not the subject of an unsatisfied comment. 7339 "BSS, mesh and TDLS Delete the ", mesh" MAC interfaces" implies a mesh is not a BSS, but it is (a.k.a. MBSS) Context: “The PARTIAL_AID_LIST_GID00 parameter includes the list of partial AIDs that the STA is an intended recipient of on its BSS, mesh and TDLS interfaces associated with group ID 0. The settings of the PARTIAL_AID are specified in 9.17a (Group ID and partial AID in VHT PPDUs)).” Proposed Resolution: Accepted. (Note that this is a subset of the resolution to CID 7342, which also deletes the cited text). 7342 What exactly does "interfaces" Clarify MAC mean here? Discussion. Perhaps we need help from ARC here. My take is that was supposed to appeal to the “interfaces” existence of separate into which traffic for BSS and TDLS operation flowed indepdendently. I don’t believe this is any model described by 802.11. We have a single MAC Data SAP per MAC entity, end of story. That MAC entity can be receiving data from a TDLS peer and its AP, and there is nothing at the MAC SAP to differentiate it. Proposed Resolution: Revised. Delete “on its BSS, mesh and TDLS interfaces” at 29.24 and 29.34. 7353 There are vague rumours that Either publicly deny the MAC multiple RTS/CTSes are allowed rumours, or extend Annex G in a TXOP involving MU PPDUs, (and probably some stuff in but this is not allowed by Annex clause 9) G Discussion: In R0, I proposed a reject. At the TGac ad-hoc we determined that this response was incorrect.
7123 "requires" is a "shall", which does not appear to be intended. Replace "that the PHY requires to change" with "for the PHY to change". MAC Proposed Resolution Rejected. This comment is out of This comment is on text that is not changed in this recirculation, is not affected by other changes in this recirculation, and is not the subject of an unsatisfied comment. 7339 "BSS, mesh and TDLS interfaces" implies a mesh is not a BSS, but it is (a.k.a. MBSS) Delete the ", mesh" MAC Context: “The PARTIAL_AID_LIST_GID00 parameter includes the list of partial AIDs that the STA is an intended recipient of on its BSS, mesh and TDLS interfaces associated with group ID 0. The settings of the PARTIAL_AID are specified in 9.17a (Group ID and partial AID in VHT PPDUs)).” Proposed Resolution: Accepted. (Note that this is a subset of the resolution to CID 7342, which also deletes the cited text). 7342 What exactly does "interfaces" mean here? Clarify MAC Discussion. Perhaps we need help from ARC here. My take is that “interfaces” was supposed to appeal to the existence of separate into which traffic for BSS and TDLS operation flowed indepdendently. I don’t believe this is any model described by 802.11. We have a single MAC Data SAP per MAC entity, end of story. That MAC entity can be receiving data from a TDLS peer and its AP, and there is nothing at the MAC SAP to differentiate it. Proposed Resolution: Revised. Delete “on its BSS, mesh and TDLS interfaces” at 29.24 and 29.34. 7353 There are vague rumours that multiple RTS/CTSes are allowed in a TXOP involving MU PPDUs, but this is not allowed by Annex G Either publicly deny the rumours, or extend Annex G (and probably some stuff in clause 9) MAC Discussion: In R0, I proposed a reject. At the TGac ad-hoc we determined that this response was incorrect.
11-12-1284-05-00ac-lb190-stephens-comment-resolutions.docx