there are no such parameters anymore (we deleted them in favour of dot11(Re)AssociationResponseTimeOut) Discussion: Nah, probably just easier to go with the dot11 flow! Proposed changes: Change 1017.26 as follows: A non-PCP and non-AP STA that receives a DMG Operation element can use the of this field to configure the AssociateFailureTimeout parameter in the MLME-ASSOCIATE.request primitive and the ReassociateFailureTimeout parameter in the MLME-REASSOCIATE.request primitive set dot11AssociationResponseTimeOut. Change 1719.47 as follows: the STA has sent a (Re)Association Request frame within dot11AssociationResponseTimeOut but has not received a corresponding (Re)Association Response frame and the (Re)AssociateFailureTimeout has not expired At 2885.19 change to “Association” “(Re)Association”. Proposed resolution: REVISED Make the changes shown under changes” for CID 7240 in <this document>, which instead kill “Proposed (Re)AssociateFailureTimeout again. Identifiers Comment Proposed change CID 7317 "A STA contained in the AP or PCP shall Change to "A STA contained in the Mark RISON initialize its TSF timer independently of any AP or PCP shall initialize its TSF 11.1.2.1 simultaneously started APs or PCPs" -- this timer independently of any 1554.34 cannot in general be acheved, unless the simultaneously started APs or PCPs APs/PCPs are coordinated. Needs to be it is aware of", or delete restricted to managed ("enterprise/corporate") contexts, but this is arguably out of scope of the standard anyway Discussion: A STA doesn’t necessarily know about simultaneously-started APs or PCPs. Proposed changes: Option 1: Delete the offending sentence.
there are no such parameters anymore (we deleted them in favour of dot11(Re)AssociationResponseTimeOut) Discussion: Nah, probably just easier to go with the dot11 flow! Proposed changes: Change 1017.26 as follows: A non-PCP and non-AP STA that receives a DMG Operation element can use the of this field to configure the AssociateFailureTimeout parameter in the MLME-ASSOCIATE.request primitive and the ReassociateFailureTimeout parameter in the MLME-REASSOCIATE.request primitive set dot11AssociationResponseTimeOut. Change 1719.47 as follows: the STA has sent a (Re)Association Request frame within dot11AssociationResponseTimeOut but has not received a corresponding (Re)Association Response frame and the (Re)AssociateFailureTimeout has not expired At 2885.19 change “Association” to “(Re)Association”. Proposed resolution: REVISED Make the changes shown under “Proposed changes” for CID 7240 in <this document>, which instead kill (Re)AssociateFailureTimeout again. Identifiers Comment Proposed change CID 7317 Mark RISON 11.1.2.1 1554.34 "A STA contained in the AP or PCP shall initialize its TSF timer independently of any simultaneously started APs or PCPs" -- this cannot in general be acheved, unless the APs/PCPs are coordinated. Needs to be restricted to managed ("enterprise/corporate") contexts, but this is arguably out of scope of the standard anyway Change to "A STA contained in the AP or PCP shall initialize its TSF timer independently of any simultaneously started APs or PCPs it is aware of", or delete Discussion: A STA doesn’t necessarily know about simultaneously-started APs or PCPs. Proposed changes: Option 1: Delete the offending sentence.
11-16-0276-10-000m-resolutions-for-some-comments-on-11mc-d5-0-sbmc1.docx