October 2004 doc.: IEEE802.11-04/1200r0

IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs

Minutes for the TGk September 2004 Session

Date:

October 19, 2004

Author:

Steve Emeott
Motorola, Inc.
1301 E. Algonquin Rd.

Schaumburg, IL 60196
Phone: 847-576-8268
Fax: 847-576-3240
e-Mail:


Tuesday, October 19, 2004

8:45 AM – 12:30 PM

  1. Chair calls the conference to order at 8:45 AM
  2. Attendance
  3. Review IEEE 802 & 802.11 Policies and Rules
  4. Patent Policy
  5. Inappropriate Topics
  6. Documentation – 4 hour rule for changes that are normative
  7. Voting
  8. Roberts Rules
  9. Objectives for Meeting 04-1193r0
  10. LB71 Technical Comment Resolution
  11. Comment Incorporation into new draft (D2.0)
  12. Go to second letter ballot –San Antonio Meeting
  13. Proposed Agenda
  14. Security, RCPI, Periodic, Parallel (10/19)
  15. Noise, TPC, QoS, Media sense, MIB (10/20)
  16. Hidden, Beacon, neighbor, STA (10/21)
  17. PICS, Prepare Motions for San Antonio (10/22)
  18. Technical Comment Resolution
  19. Next major milestone: Second Letter Ballot
  20. Categorization and Assignment of Technical Comments

Email was sent to the reflector with all comments and their categories

  1. Security (Paine)
  2. RCPI (Black/Kwak)
  3. Periodic (Kwak)
  4. Parallel (Black)
  5. Noise (Soomro)
  6. TPC (Klein)
  7. QoS (Kwak)
  8. Medsense (Soomro)
  9. MIB (Gray)
  10. Hidden (Black)
  11. Beacon (Emeott)
  12. Neighbor (O'Hara)
  13. STA (O'Hara)
  14. Security – All
  15. PICS (Black)
  1. Meeting in recess at 8:55 to work on comment resolutions.
  2. Chair brings the meeting back into session at 9:47 PM from recess
  3. Chair called for presentations, and hearing none…
  4. Meeting in recess at 9:48 to work on comment resolutions until 11:45
  5. Chair brings the meeting back into session at 11:49 PM from recess
  6. Paul grey provided inputs on MIB
  7. Ready to review Security comments today
  8. Ready to review RCPI comments today, document 04/1141r0
  9. Is there any objection to following presentation format in 04/1193r1
  10. Hearing none, we will start with document 04/1141r0, looking at the subcategory simple error
  11. Addressing comment 935
  12. We have no idea when we get a measurement what antenna is being used
  13. We do have notion of diversity antennas, but it is not consistent throughout
  14. Comment, in the proposed resolution, what does the term current antenna mean
  15. Change resolution to “at the output of the currently in use receiving antenna connector”.
  16. No objection to accepting resolution to comment 935 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  17. Addressing comment 375 and 492, no objection to accepting comments 375 and 492 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  18. Addressing comment 555, no objection to accepting resolution to 555 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  19. Addressing comment 627, no objection to accepting resolution to 627 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  20. Addressing comment 197, no objection to accepting resolution to 197 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  21. Addressing comment 215, no objection to accepting resolution to 215 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  22. Reviewing comment 563
  23. Comment that resolution is not a complete sentence
  24. Sentence completed to indicate that if multiple measurements are obtained, the last is reported
  25. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 563 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  26. Addressing comment 180, no objection to accepting resolution to 180 in 04/1196r0 so the resolution is accepted
  27. Meeting in recess at 12:30


Tuesday, October 19, 2004

1:30 PM – 6:00 PM

  1. Chair calls meeting back into session at 1:55 PM
  2. Addressing comment 183
  3. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 183 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  4. Addressing comment 203
  5. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 203 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  6. Addressing comment 207
  7. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 207 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  8. Addressing comment 216
  9. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 216 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  10. Addressing comment 231
  11. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 231 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  12. Addressing comment 21
  13. RCPI of the probe request as measured by the responding STA
  14. Where is RCPI defined, it is defined in three places
  15. It would be more clear to refer to the RCPI measurement for the applicable PHY
  16. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 21 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  17. Addressing comment 448
  18. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 448 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  19. Addressing comment 636
  20. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 636 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  21. Addressing comment 783
  22. Is there any objection to accepting the resolution to comment 783 in document 04/1196r0, hearing none the resolution is accepted.
  23. Next on the agenda are the security comments out of 04/0964r13
  24. Chair stepped down, handed the chair over to Bernard Aboba
  25. Addressing comment 601
  26. If someone is acking something you do not hear, whether security is in use is irrelevant
  27. The commenter was not specific about what interactions might occur
  28. Addressing comment 670
  29. Can not reject this comment on the same grounds
  30. Is this saying that for each report, we should describe the specific security properties
  31. Comment was more specific than that
  32. Comment: If a rogue AP gets on the neighbor report, how would a STA know
  33. The text describes how an AP should not allow a rogue AP into the list
  34. Once a rogue AP gets in, STA is not protected
  35. However, clause 7.3.2.26 does state that only legitimate APs should be included in the neighbor report
  36. Addressing comment 679, recommend accepting suggested remedy
  37. Addressing comment 717
  38. Change reachable to Pre-Auth, change RNS to security procedures, otherwise accept suggested remedy
  39. However, making this change involves more than a global search and replace
  40. In general, if for some reason Pre-Auth will not work, set this bit to not reachable
  41. Bit would say you do not want to roam to neighbor at all
  42. If you are saying something is not reachable, then you are saying STA must switch submit
  43. Subnet is an AP layer concept, we tried to signal this information but did not succeed
  44. Problem you will get into is people will say what does this mean and when should I set it
  45. Could respond back that comment is OK, but text must be supplied to indicate what security policies mean
  46. Alternate proposal, change RSN to security and RSN bit to security bit. And then we will need to edit the text to get things in there correctly
  47. how about adding text to the reachability to indicate that upper layer service interruption is what needs to be avoided
  48. RSN refers to a specific 802.11i IE, whereas it would be nice to generalize the definition to refer to any robust security network profile
  49. Addressing comment 718
  50. Addressing comment 741
  51. Note that the TGr scope does not include scanning issues preceding the transition
  52. Meeting in recess at 3:20 until 3:40
  53. Chair calls the meeting into order at 1542
  54. 898 Accepted
  55. 912 Accepted as part of comment 717
  56. 932 – Same as 848
  57. 930 – Same as 848
  58. 945 – Same as 848
  59. 1014 – Same as 679
  60. 1020 – Same as 718
  61. Chair back to Paine from Bernard
  62. MIB from Paul Gray
  63. Paul had gone through the MIB comments and marked some as accepted
  64. He had also created a Word document to give instruction to the editor
  65. 11k cross checked the comments with the Word document and marked the comments as cross checked.
  66. Meeting recessed at 1730 to reconvene at 8am on Wed, 10/20/04


1

Submission Richard Paine, Boeing