Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Haorui, Thanks for your questions. Please see my responses inline below. From: Haorui Yang (Rae) <yanghaorui0217@xxxxxxx>
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros. Hi Duncan,
Thanks for preparing the drafts. Please find my comments as below: To Part 4: 1. Why the direct preparation to target AP MLD is performed separately? Since the non-AP MLD can exchange the frames with the target AP MLD, it means that the non-AP MLD is already in the
coverage of targe AP MLD. Also the emergency case is aimed as said in the PDT, the time seems too long with perform both prepareation and execution, which makes it more valuable. Why not merging the preparation function to the execution? [DH] There are a few reasons. Since preparation is mandatory, to keep the ST protocol simple and uniform, the same 4-msg sequence is reused. Also, to support the Different PTK mode (per-AP MLD PTK), we need
at least 3 msgs anyway so to make ST 4-msg sequence work uniform for all cases: via the current, via the target, emergency, same PTK, and Diff PTK. 2. Why is the new random MAC address assigned? Can be it recognized by all the other AP MLD in the same SSD? [DH] Yes, the SMD will need to populate this random MAC address to all the target AP MLDs that the network wants to prepare for emergency roaming. Also, how to use this new MAC address is missing in the subclauses for preparation and execution phase, which makes it imcomplete soltuion. [DH] This address is used as the TA of the ST prep/exec request frames. 3. The new MAC address is sent securely to the non-AP MLD but it is not clear how. Also this IE cannot be sent in the PDT of part 5. Does it imply that this address is sent without using
the frames in 802.11? [DH] The MAC address will need to be sent securely to the non-AP MLD like you mentioned. The actual signaling is TBD for now. This value has to be sent during the initial association and also subsequent roaming
via the target (emergency or not). To Part 5: Why is the target AP MLD address and listen interval in preparation request are deleted? Is this intentional? [DH] Since those are already required mandatory fields in the field definition, I removed them in the normative section. No technical change. Thanks, Duncan BRs, Haorui Yang(Rae) China Mobile ---- Replied Message ----
Dear Seamless Roaming TTT, I’ve prepared these documents for the ad-hoc meeting next week. Could you please let me know if you have any comments or questions? 25/753r2 PDT MAC on Seamless Roaming Part 3 (Security) – the r1 was presented before so this
is an updated version 25/1020r0 PDT-CR MAC on Seamless Roaming Part 4 (Emergency roaming) – not presented before 25/1101r0 PDT-CR MAC on Seamless Roaming Part 5 (Detailed frame formats and signaling) –
not presented before Thanks, Duncan To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1 |