IEEE P802.11 Wireless LANs Resolutions for some comments on 11mc/D4.0 2015-0- Date: Author(s): Name Affiliation Address Phone email at samsung (a global Samsung Cambridge commercial entity) Mark RISON SJH, CB4 0DS, U.K. +44 1223 434600 Solution Centre I'm the letter emme then dot rison Identifiers Comment Proposed change CID 6562 The exception for the PM bit in Probe Get rid of this special case (in 3.2, Mark Responses sent in response to unicast Probe 8.2.4.1.7 and 10.2.2.4) Requests in an IBSS makes no sense CID 6563 Lots of things are ambiguous/unclear in I will propose text (not possible to Mark relation to power-saving signalling and give here) 10 mechanisms 1529 CID 6075 The details of when the PM subfield is valid A submission will be made by Mark Hamilton are still a bit murky. (This is a follow-on Mark Hamilton with 8.2.4.1.7 comment to changes already made which specific proposed changes. 566.52 improved things, but left a bit of work to do.) Also, PM should be discussed as a field/subfield, not a "bit". Discussion: [Work in progress!] 1) IBSS issue 1 10.2.3.4 [IBSS] STA state transitions says: A STA shall set the Power Management subfield in the Frame Control field of frames containing all or part of a BU or individually addressed Probe Request frame that it transmits using the rules in 8.2.4.1.7 (Power Management field). 8.2.4.1.7 says: In an IBSS, the Power Management field is valid only in frame exchanges as described in 10.2.3.4 (STA power state transitions). This is circular. 2) IBSS issue 2 10.2.3.5 ATIM frame and frame transmission says:
IEEE P802.11 Wireless LANs Resolutions for some comments on 11mc/D4.0 Date: 2015-0- Author(s): Name Affiliation Address Phone email Mark RISON Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre SJH, CB4 0DS, U.K. +44 1223 434600 at samsung (a global commercial entity) I'm the letter emme then dot rison Identifiers Comment Proposed change CID 6562 Mark The exception for the PM bit in Probe Responses sent in response to unicast Probe Requests in an IBSS makes no sense Get rid of this special case (in 3.2, 8.2.4.1.7 and 10.2.2.4) CID 6563 Mark 10 1529 Lots of things are ambiguous/unclear in relation to power-saving signalling and mechanisms I will propose text (not possible to give here) CID 6075 Mark Hamilton 8.2.4.1.7 566.52 The details of when the PM subfield is valid are still a bit murky. (This is a follow-on comment to changes already made which improved things, but left a bit of work to do.) Also, PM should be discussed as a field/subfield, not a "bit". A submission will be made by Mark Hamilton with specific proposed changes. Discussion: [Work in progress!] 1) IBSS issue 1 10.2.3.4 [IBSS] STA state transitions says: A STA shall set the Power Management subfield in the Frame Control field of frames containing all or part of a BU or individually addressed Probe Request frame that it transmits using the rules in 8.2.4.1.7 (Power Management field). 8.2.4.1.7 says: In an IBSS, the Power Management field is valid only in frame exchanges as described in 10.2.3.4 (STA power state transitions). This is circular. 2) IBSS issue 2 10.2.3.5 ATIM frame and frame transmission says:
11-15-0762-04-000m-resolutions-for-some-comments-on-11mc-d4-0-sbmc0.docx