Hi Mohamed,
This seems good. Did you also make similar changes to the definition of the LLI Requested subfield ? If not would suggest to make a similar change.
“he LLI Requested field is reserved if the QoS (#12606, #5027, #6347)Characteristics element is sent by a non-UHR non-AP STA or a
UHR non-AP STA affiliated with a non-AP MLD that does not contain an affiliated STA which supports LLI or if the Direction subfield is 1(#11174)
(Downlink).”
Regards,
Dibakar
From: Mohamed Abouelseoud <mohamed.a.abouelseoud@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2025 9:07 PM
To: Das, Dibakar <dibakar.das@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: STDS-802-11-TGBN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] LB291 - LLI CRs part 1 uploaded
Hi Dibakar,
Thanks for your comments and feedback.
Please see my response below
Thank you for working on this document. I have a clarification q on this part:
“If an LLI non-AP STA has established an SCS stream with its associated LLI AP in which the LLI Requested field in the QoS Characteristics element is equal to 1 and the Direction field in the QoS Characteristics has value 0 (Uplink), the
LLI non-AP STA shall not establish an SCS stream with its associated LLI AP in which the LLI Requested subfield in the QoS Characteristics element is equal to 1 and the Direction subfield in the QoS Characteristics has value 2 (Direct Link).”
-
There are two bits for LLI indication for UL and P2P respectively. This constraint makes one bit redundant. What is the plan for the frame format : does it stay unchanged still ?
[MA] I would prefer to keep it as is for future updates. We do have many reserved bits and possibly we can enable multi-SCS with different directions in future amendments
-
-
Say, LLI is supported on two links. STA MLD sends SCS Req (UL, LLI = true) on link 1. Is it allowed to send SCS Req (P2P, LLI = true) on link 2 ? Given that SCS is at MLD level, I assume the intention of the current sentence is for that not to be allowed.
If so, will it be clearer to replace “non-AP STA” with “non-AP STA MLD” above ? Or, with any “STA affiliated with a non-AP MLD” ?
[MA] that its a valid comment. We can update the text as follows, would that be okay for you?
“If an LLI non-AP STA affiliated to a non-AP MLD has established an SCS stream with its associated LLI AP in which the LLI Requested field in the QoS Characteristics element is equal to 1 and the Direction field in the QoS Characteristics
has value 0 (Uplink), an LLI non-AP STA affiliated with the same non-AP MLD shall not establish an SCS stream with its associated LLI AP in which the LLI Requested subfield in the QoS Characteristics element is equal to 1 and the Direction subfield in the
QoS Characteristics has value 2 (Direct Link).”
This is to update that r6 of 11-25-1918 has been uploaded with some of the deferred SPs updated in green. I am planning to run SP on the green CRs
I have uploaded 11-25-1918r0 to resolve 118 comments on LLI
Please let me know if you have any feedback or comments
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
|