Oct 2004 doc IEEE 802 11 041206 r

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 TGk LB 71 Parallel category comment resolution Simon Black (Nokia) simon. black@intalk 2 k. com Submission 1 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Parallel bit only in radio measurement frames Recommended Resolution • Accept #396, #410, #987 • The intent of this sentence is to make parallel bit apply to 11 k measurements and not 11 h when 11 h and 11 k appear rolled -up. • Suggest this intent is clarified by rewording ‘The Parallel bit is not used and shall be set to 0 in elements requesting spectrum management measurement types. ’ Comments • Clarify and correct the last sentence of the text describing the parallel bit in 7. 3. 2. 21 – ‘… shall only be set to 1 in measurement report elements …’ • Text should refer to request and not report • Comments #396, #410, #987 Submission 2 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Parallel bit in measurement report elements Comments • Can parallel bit setting between request and report be different? • Is the parallel bit necessary in the report? • Incorrect tense used in definition of parallel bit use in measurement report • Comments #512, #516, #517, #520, #524, #525, #1004 Submission Recommended Resolution • Resolution – Accept #512, #1004, Counter #516, #517, #520, #524, #525 • Remove parallel bit from measurement report. Since each measurement includes an actual measurement start time and duration the function adds no value. 3 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Parallel bit in first, or only element in measurement request frame Comments • Use of parallel bit in the first, or only element of a request frame is not defined • Description of parallel bit requires that a receiver process the measurement requests in the order that they appear in the frame • Comments #397, #398 Submission Recommended Resolution • Accept #397, #398 • Add text to 7. 3. 2. 21 to set parallel bit to 0 in the first, or only measurement request element in the frame • Add text to 11. 7 to say that a receiver processes measurements in the order that they appear in the frame. 4 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Impossible parallel measurements Comments • Some measurements cannot be made in parallel, e. g. measurements on different channels • Comment #408 Submission Recommended Resolution • Accept #408 • Add text to return ‘incapable’ if the measuring STA cannot support requested parallel measurements, e. g. due to the measurements being on different channels 5 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Enable bit is redundant Comments • Suggests removing the enable bit since the same functionality can be obtained by using the length field (measurement request is empty for enable use) • Comment #399 Submission Recommended Resolution • Decline #399 • The mechanism being used is from the 11 h measurement protocol without change 6 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 No randomization interval Comments • Request the addition of text to clarify that Randomization Interval = 0 means that no randomization interval is to be used • Comments #62, #426, #955 Submission Recommended Resolution • Accept #62, #426, #955 • Add text to 11. 7. 3 to clarify that randomization interval = 0 means no randomization interval 7 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Description of randomization interval in measurement request Recommended Resolution • Accept #36, #423 – Replace text with ‘Randomization interval specifies the upper bound of the random delay to be used prior to making the measurement in units of TU. See 11. 7. 3. ’ • Discuss #414 (editorial). Recommends a single point of definition for common fields. Could restructure to refer to one place – maybe in the first measurement request description. Views? Comments • The phrase ‘desired maximum random delay’ is used in the definition of randomization interval in each measurement request type. The terms desired, maximum and random are incompatible with each other. • Put a reference to 11. 7. 3 in all randomization delay references in clause 7. 3. 2. 21 • Put a single definition in clause 7. 3. 2. 21 and not one per type. • Comments #36, #423, #414 Submission 8 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Measurement start time Comments • Comment #425 Recommended Resolution • #425 – Decline(? ) – Define a new term ‘measurement start time’ in clause 3 and use for the randomization interval field definition and wherever else in the draft measurement start time is used. • – Not needed for randomization interval field definition if text proposed in resolution for #36 and #423 accepted. • – Proposed to delete sentence starting ‘Periodic measurements may begin…’ It is sufficient to say that measurements are made over the requested interval (NB text in this area appears to need some editorial work) Comment #400 – ‘Periodic measurements may begin at the indicated start time…’. There is no indicated start time. Submission #400 – Accept 9 Black, Nokia

Oct 2004 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -04/1206 r 0 Miscellaneous Recommended Resolution Comments • Comment #65 on 11. 7. 3 • Comment #65 - Seek Clarification. – ‘It is unclear what is the root cause of the traffic storms and how a randomization interval resolves the problem…’ – Not sure what commenter desires; more explanation, removal of the concept, …? • Comment #406 - Decline(? ) – Is it necessary to specify inclusion (what about iterative measurements too)? Suggest that text is inclusive unless it says otherwise? • Comment #406 – Does parallel apply to periodic measurements? If so add text to say so. • Comment #996 - Accept. • Comment #996 – Define what is meant by iteratively; suggest that all supported channels are measured in sequence – What does iteratively mean in 7. 3. 2. 21. 6? Submission 10 Black, Nokia