discussion of lb201 cid4609 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Discussion of LB201 CID4609 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Discussion of LB201 CID4609

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23
wynter-castro

Discussion of LB201 CID4609 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

73 Views
Download Presentation
Discussion of LB201 CID4609
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Discussion of LB201 CID4609 Authors: Date: 2014-05-12 Marc Emmelmann, Self

  2. Abstract Discussion of LB201 CID4609 The presentation compiles the LB198 comments that are quoted in LB201 CID4609. The presentation is intended to stipulate a discussion in TGai on how to resolve the comment LB201 CID4609. The presentation does not provide any suggested resolution text. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  3. LB201 CID4609 • Comment: • My previous comments to D1.0 were not answered nor there was attempt to reconciliate the following CID to the commenter: 2762, 2763, 2764, 2766, 2767, 2769, 2773, 2774, 2775, 2776, 2777, 2779, 2783, 2786, 2787, 2792, • Proposed resolution • The commenter did not a proposed resolution Marc Emmelmann, Self

  4. Summary of LB198 (on D1.0) comments referred to in the new comment Marc Emmelmann, Self

  5. LB198 CID2762 • Comment • thefilteringbehaviordescribed in the FILS Request Parameters is non indicative of the AP ability to supporttheprobing STA connection'sQoSrequirements, itdoeslimittheprobability of otherSTA'srelaying on thesame Probe Reqthusconflicting to the Probe Rspbroadcastadd. • Proposed Resolution • have all APsrespond and selectfromwithinthose and havethe AP indicatethe FILS criteria in the Probe Rsp, attemptassociationonly to APsthatqualifies. A multiple sessioncanbeexecuted to shorten time to associatione.g. give a temporaryadd. oridentifier to associate Probe Req, Rsp and association to a single STA. • Approved Resolution • REJECTED. The Probe Response criterionisreducingthenumber of probe responsemessages and avoiding probe responsestorms and heavy large overhead. The STA has possiblity to request Probe responsefrom all APs, butitmay also reducethe probe responsetransmissionsfromAPsthatitisnotinterested. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  6. LB198 CID2763 • Comment • Thetype of PHY (HT/VHT) is non indicative of the AP ability to supporttheprobing STA connection'sQoSrequirements, itdoeslimittheprobability of otherSTA'srelaying on thesame Probe Reqthusconflicting to the Probe Rspbroadcastadd. whathappenswhenthenext PHY isavailable? whatabout 11ad? whataboutthe DS limitations as thesemaybe (and in many time are) morelimmitingthanthe last hop? • Proposed Resolution • defineresourcerequirementinstead of PHY layertype. • Approved Resolution • REJECTED. The 802.11ai sawvalue of keepingthe HT and VHT fields. Thecommenterisnotprovidingdetails of hteresourcerequirementmechanism. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  7. LB198 CID2764 • Comment • theusagemodel and usecases of 11ai aredensedeployment and heavyloadsignalingand/ortraffic. as a result a power measurement such as RCPI isnotindicative and a CINR ismoreappropriatevalue. • Regardless of that, theActiveScanningscenarioislimited in statisticswhich to a couple of dozens of DB (+10DB) in pedestrianenvironmentsmakingithighlyundesirable as metricforresponseconditioning. • Please also notethat in many of thePHYsthe link budgetchangesdrasticallybetweendiscovery/association and actualdatatransferthususingthe RCPI metric of a singletransmissionis non indicative. • Proposed Resolution • Remove RCPI as metric of channelconditions to whenresponding to Probe Req • Approved Resolution • REJECTED (TGai General: 2013-09-19 11:34:46Z) - REJECTED. The RCPI valueindicatesthatthe AP is in proximity. Estimation of theinterferenceiscomplicated and requireslongerestimation time thatisavailable in scanning. • Typicallytheinterferenceis in busychannelthatmaybedetectedfrom BSS Load and othervalues. • Theresponding AP cannotknowtheinterferencelevel of the STA thattransmittedthe probe request. Itismoreessetial to knowtheinterference in STA, becausetherearemore DL traffic. • However, theinterference at the STA islessdependent on theselected AP, and thereforedoesnotneed to betakenintoaccount. • In summary, itishighlylikelythatthe AP withstrongest RCPI of the probe message also gives best channelqualityforthecommunication Marc Emmelmann, Self

  8. LB198 CID2766 • Comment • Some of theconditionsforresponsearenot "information" butareconditionsthususingtheterminology "sameinformation" isnot well defined • Proposed Resolution • clarifywhatinformationrefers to. • Approved Resolution • REVISED. Thecommenteris right thattheinformationthatisreferredisnotaccuratelydefined. Theinformaitonisdefined to bethe SSID and the 10.1.4.3.3 conditionsallowmoreresponses to betransmitted as written in thesubmission https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx . Marc Emmelmann, Self

  9. LB198 CID2767 • Comment • Different STA mayhavedrastic different channelconditions to a an AP whilesome of theconditionsarespatial/channelrelatede.g. RCPI, • minimumdata rate. itisnotpossible to inferfromtheconditions of one STA to another. • Proposed Resolution • Excludespatial and channelrelatedparametersforconsideration as conditioing Probe Rspfromotherparameters • Approved Resolution • REJECTED (TGai General: 2014-01-20 21:50:18Z) --- 802.11ai taskgroup has discussedextensively on thepossibility to reducethenumber of unnecessarilytransmittedscanningframes, like Probe Requests and especially Probe Responses. Theconclusion of thesediscussionsisthatavoiding Probe Response storms and improvingthesystemperformance of the WLAN ishighlydesireable.Especially in thedensedeploymentsthenumber of Probe Response frametransmissionsfromtheAPsthathavepoor link to therequesting STA maybevery high. • Thecriteria to respondwith Probe Response setrules on whichresponsestherequesting STA isinterested. Therulesmaydefine a link performancethreshold, congestionthresholdorcapabilitythresholds. Theuse of thecriteriadepends on thescanning STA. Itislikelythatscanning STA usesthecriteria, ifitisaware of bettercandidate. • The RCPI valueindicatesthatthe AP is in proximity. Estimation of the RCPI valuefromthe Probe Requestframeisalreadypart of the 802.11 standard. In 802.11 standardthetransmitter of the Probe Requestmayrequestthat RCPI measurementisincluded to the Probe Response frame. Theresponsecriteriausestheverysameassessmentfor RCPI. • Also itshouldbenotedthatestimation of theinterferenceiscomplicated and requireslongerestimation time thatisavailable in scanning. Theinterferencebasedscanningorthetransmission rate estimationhavebeendeletedfromthe 802.11ai forthesake of clarity. • Typicallytheinterferenceis in busychannelthatmaybedetectedfrom BSS Load and othervalues. • Theresponding AP cannotknowtheinterferencelevel of the STA thattransmittedthe probe request. Itismoreessetial to knowhteinterference in STA, becausethereismore DL traffic.However, theinterference at the STA islessdependent on theselected AP, and thereforedoesnotneed to betakenintoaccount. In summary, itishighlylikelythatthe AP withstrongest RCPI of the probe message also gives best channelqualityforthecommunication Marc Emmelmann, Self

  10. LB198 CID2769 • Comment • theusage of "may" makesitpossibleforany of thefollowingbehaviors: 1.) Transmittalunder dot11FILSActivated false. 2.) non trasmittal3.) Other • Proposed Resolution • clarifythatthe AP STA with dot11FILSActivated True has to transmit a probe response per 10.1.4.3.7 or per thebehaviorwhere dot11FILSActivated equalfalse. • Approved Resolution • REVISED. Thecriteriawhenthe FILS STA maytransmit a Probe Response aredefined in the 10.1.4.3.8. Theclausesaresimplified and mademoreclearbystartingtheclause 10.1.4.3.7 bydefiningwhichrulestheresponding STA shouldfollow. Themay in response condition was a generalterm and notpreciseenough. Similar to CID 2712.The text isshown in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx . Marc Emmelmann, Self

  11. LB198 CID2773 • Comment • "theresponse" is non specific, e.g. if 2 ormore Probe Requestsreceived, which of theassociatedresponsesisrefered to as "theresponse"? • Proposed Resolution • Replace "theresponse" w/ oneormore of theresponses. • Approved Resolution • REVISED. This CID canbesuperceededby CID 2849. Proposed text iscoveredbycontrution 1269r6. See merged text in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  12. LB198 CID2774 • Comment • paragraphsection 10.1.4.3.8 allowsfortheomission of Probe Rspevenwhenthecontent of the Probe Rspmaynotbeidenticaldue to different informationrequestedbythe Probe Reqoriginator. • Proposed Resolution • the text shouldreflectthatomission of Probe Rspisallowedonlyifthecancelled Probe Rspmessagesarecontainedwithinthetransmitted Probe Rspmessage. • Approved Resolution • REVISED. • This CID canbesuperceededby CID 2775. Proposed text iscoveredbycontrution 1269r6. See merged text in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  13. LB198 CID2775 • Comment • Thismechanismpreventsthe STA fromdiscoveringthe AP withthe best link budgetconditionssimplybecauseanother AP STA withinthesame SSID respondedfasterdue to temporarymedium and schedulingbehavior. The AP has no ability to identifythe link budget and channelconditionsbetween STA transmittingthe Probe Req and neighbor AP STA respondingwith Probe Rsp. • Proposed Resolution • Removemechanism • Approved Resolution • REVISED. • Commentorhave a valid point thatThismechanismpreventsthe STA fromdiscoveringthe AP withthe best link budgetconditions. • Proposed text iscoveredbycontrution 1269r6. See merged text in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  14. LB198 CID2776 • Comment • At the AP sidetransmissionQues and schedulingmakesithardforthe AP to follow, thusproposemakingit a MAY instead of a should. • Proposed Resolution • Replace "should" with "may". • Approved Resolution • REVISED • Proposed text iscoveredbycontrution 1269r6. See merged text in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  15. LB198 CID2777 • Comment • ifthe Probe Response Reception time elementisnotpresentthedefaultvalue of MaxProbeResponseTimeshouldbeused. howeverthis text is non specific as to whatshouldthe AP STA do in thiscase. • Proposed Resolution • in case a the Probe Reqfrom an 11ai STA didnotinclude a Probe Response Reception Time Element, limitthe AP to comparethe time difference to thenext TBTT to withinthedefualtMaxProbeResponseTime. • Approved Resolution • REVISED (TGai General: 2014-01-22 05:21:15Z) - Revised. • Note to commenter: Current text doesnotincludebehaviorwhentheMaxChannelTimeisnotincluded in the Probe Request. The text ischangedaccordingly • Instruction to editor: incorporatechanges as specified in 11-14/0110r1 (Proposedresolutioneditinginstructions, page 4-5) Marc Emmelmann, Self

  16. LB198 CID2779 • Comment • Ifthe Probe Reqincluded a Request Element and the AP STA respondswith a Beaconinstead of a Request Element the non AP STA doesnotreceivefulfilingresponse. • Proposed Resolution • iftherequestelementisincluded in Probe Req, a directed Probe Rspshallbeusedinstead of theBeacon. • Approved Resolution • REVISED. • Commentisreasonable. Requestelementincludesindividualparameters as well as commonparameters (e.g., RCPI) • Proposed text iscoveredbycontrution 1269r6. See merged text in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/13/11-13-1269-06-00ai-active-scanning-text.docx. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  17. LB198 CID2783 • Comment • Classifyisnotdefinedthusitis AP behaviornotactionable. • Proposed Resolution • Clarifywhatclassifyis in thatcontext and the AP behavior as a resulte.g. isthere an indirectordirectindication of this? • Approved Resolution • Revised. • No actionneededforeditors, as thecommented text was deletedby an acceptedcomment, #2851. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  18. LB198 CID2786 • Comment • Allowingthe AP to classifyotherelements as dynamicmakesthe CCC mechanism obsolete as thereis no indication/agreementbetween non AP STA and AP STA of whatis a dynamic and staticelement in thebeacon. As as resultthe a FILS STA receivingthe CCC still has to compareeachelementwithinthebeacon to identifywhich of theelementsarepreceived as dynamicorstaticbythe AP. • Proposed Resolution • Removethelines 39,40 and/orspecifytheexactelements. • Approved Resolution • Revised. • No actionisneeded to resolvethiscomment, as thecommented text isdeleted as part of thecommentresolutionprocess. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  19. LB198 CID2787 • Comment • Theprocedurefor FILS doesnotenabledeviceswhichare stringent on battery life to comply to theusage of FILS. Sincemostdevicestodayare such, it 11ai misses on providingforitsusecases. • Proposed Resolution • Modify 10.1.4.3.2 to providefor AP discovery of PWR strangitdevices • Approved Resolution • REJECTED (TGai General: 2014-01-20 21:51:20Z) -- Thecommentfails to identifyanyproblemor to proposeanytechnicalfeature. 802.11ai isimprovingthescanningoperation. Faster and morereliablescanningoperationreducesthe power consumption of the PWR strangitdevices. • FromAd-Hoc-Notes: • TGai General: 2013-11-11 23:34:59Z - Intensivlydiscussed. Group doesnotseethatthecommentdoesnotprovide a adoptable text thatwouldsatisfythecomment. Thecomenter was involved in thediscussion and was asked to bring a presentation as a follow up to his commentwhichshouldidentifywhyTgaiisnotalreadysolvingtheissue and whatarethecommenterstechnicalideas to address / solve his concerns. • Tgai General: 2013-11-11 22:00:27Z - Discussedproposedresolutionsduringtelecons on Oct. 8 & Oct. 15. Correspondingresolutions and text implementingtheresolutionsarecontained in 11-13/1269r0 and in 11-13/1269r0 Feedback requestedfromthegroup to come up with a final revisionforthenextface-to-facemeeting.. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  20. LB198 CID2792 • Comment • Thereis no definition of whatisthemaximumdurationbetweenconsecutiveinstance of FILS Dis. frame and between FILS Dis. and regularbeacon. As a result a STA performing passive scanningcannotknowwhat'stheminimumdurationitshouldexpectfordiscovery of FILS AP. • Proposed Resolution • Definetheminimumdurationeither as fixedor as a setvalue Dot11MinFilsDiscDuration • Approved Resolution • Reject. • 1. Theproposedchange of thiscommentisaboutdefine a min intervalbetween FD-FD, and FD-Beacon. Actually, itisalreadydefined, as dot11FILSFDframeBeaconMinimumInterval. See line 15 page 88 in 11ai/D1.0. • 2. thecomment box of thiscommentisaboutdefinition of a maxdurationbetween FD-FD and FD-Beacon. Itisactuallynotneeded, as themaxintervalisboundedbybeaconinterval and the dot11FILSFDframeBeaconMinimumInterval. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  21. Summary Marc Emmelmann, Self

  22. Summary • All comments were addressed as part of the comment resolution process of LB198 • Proposed resolutions provide of those CIDs that were rejected during LB198 contain the reasons for rejection and further explanation. • Some CIDs the current (LB201) comment quotes referred to text in TGai D1.0 that was deleted as part of creating D2.0 • Exactly one comment made during LB198 was rejected for the reason that “The comment fails to identify any problem or to propose any technical feature. 802.11ai is improving the scanning operation. Faster and more reliable scanning operation reduces the power consumption of the PWR strangit devices.“ The corresponding ad-hoc notes indicate that the commenter was present in the discussion and was asked to provide a submission „as a follow up to his comment which should identify why Tgai is not already solving the issue and what are the commenters technical ideas to address / solve his concerns“. Such submission was not received. Marc Emmelmann, Self

  23. References Marc Emmelmann, Self