Mike Montemurro, Research in Motion, Chair of Tgae

January 2011 doc.: IEEE 802.11-10/1433r2

IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs

TGae Teleconference Minutes Dec-Jan 2011
Date: 2010-12-08
Author(s):
Name / Company / Address / Phone / email
Matthew Fischer / Broadcom / 190 Mathilda Place, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 / +1 408 543 3370 /
Michael Montemurro / Research In Motion / 4701 Tahoe Blvd. Mississauga, ON. L4W 0B4 / 905-629-4746
Ext. 14999 /
Santosh Pandey / Cisco / 170 W Tasman Dr, San Jose, CA, 95134, USA / +1-408-8535990 /

Wednesday Dec 1

11:00

Attendees:

Mike Montemurro, Research in Motion, chair of TGae

Henry Ptasinski, Broadcom – TGae editor

Matthew Fischer, Broadcom – TGae acting secretary

Santosh Pandey, Cisco – just some guy with nothing better to do but attend a TGae conference call

·  Mike Montemurro, Research in Motion, chair of TGae, calls the group to order at 08:06 AM.

·  Matthew Fischer, Broadcom volunteers to take minutes.

·  Mike discusses patent policy and refers to patent policy web link.

·  Mike asks if there are any essential patents relating to 802.11.

·  There was no response to the call for essential patents.

·  Agenda – Mike suggests that the agenda is to discuss comment resolution and asks for objection to this agenda – there is no objection

·  Mike notes that there has been an update to the TGae draft document and asks the editor Henry Ptasinski to review the changes that he has made to the draft.

·  Henry Ptasinski, Broadcom, reviews changes that were made to the draft as a result of comment resolution activity that was concluded during the November 2010 802.11 Plenary meeting.

·  Henry notes that some comment resolutions were not quite editable, the editor made modifications to those comment resolutions and will present the modified resolutions for approval in January.

·  Henry notes that there are a few specific comments which were not implementable.

·  Mike has posted 11-10-1221r9 which now includes Henry’s editor notes in column “edit notes”– resolution column has not been updated – anything that has an entry in “edit notes” and has an edit status of not “done” needs to be reviewed today and then reviewed for approval by the group in January

·  Comment discussion:

·  Resolving editor-identified conflicts – propose to resolve these conflicts and move the CIDs to a new comment group I in 11-10-1221r9 for motion in the January meeting

·  CID 141 – nothing in “edit notes” – editor cannot make changes because resolution does not specify complete instructions to resolve comment – Santosh Pandey, Cisco agrees that he needs to provide a submission – so the comment remains un-edited

·  CID 166 – resolution conflicts with CID 211 resolution – propose to change resolution of CID 166 to be identical to the resolution of CID 211 – no objection

·  CID 411 – resolution conflicts with CID 7 resolution – propose to change this resolution to match the resolution of CID 7 – no objection

·  CID 17 – resolution conflicts with CID 18 resolution - propose to change resolution to CID 17 and then copy the new resolution for CID 17 to resolution for CID 18 and move both to group I – no objection

·  CID 126 – editor notes that in addition to highlighted issue, the concept of the use of priority in general is incorrect and should in general be changed from “priority” to “access category” – group generally agrees and editing instruction is changed to make a global modification of “priority definition” to “access category assignment” and “priority” to “access category” with some allowance for editor to make necessary changes to avoid language issues, e.g. “at the priority” changes to “using the access category” and move to group I – no objection

·  CID 89 – abstract question – need an abstract – see CID 264 – move to group I – no objection

·  CID 87 – propose to accept in principle – no objection

·  CID 255 – minor changes – no objection

·  CID 19 – table subject of proposed change has been deleted, resolution modified appropriately – no objection

·  CID 397 – minor changes – no objection

·  CID 282 – editor drops a shall – no objection

·  CID 241 – no change

·  CID 125 – minor change – no objection

·  CID 403 – delete all changes to the clause – no objection

·  CID 375 – instead of TDLS discovery response, add “public” – no objection

·  CID 289 – see 337 – no objection

·  CID 420 – push the same changes to 8.3.3.6, 8, and 10 – no objection

·  Mike adjourns meeting December 8.

Wednesday Dec 8, 2010

11:00

Attendees:

Mike Montemurro, Research in Motion, chair of TGae

Henry Ptasinski, Broadcom – TGae editor

Matthew Fischer, Broadcom – TGae acting secretary

Santosh Pandey, Cisco –

John Kenney, Toyota -

.

·  Mike Montemurro, Research in Motion, chair of TGae, calls the group to order at 08:10 AM.

·  Matthew Fischer, Broadcom volunteers to take minutes.

·  Mike discusses patent policy and refers to patent policy web link.

·  Mike asks if there are any essential patents relating to 802.11.

·  There was no response to the call for essential patents.

·  Agenda – Mike suggests that the agenda is to discuss comment resolution and asks for objection to this agenda – there is no objection

·  Mike asks if there are any suggestions for which comments to review

·  Mike mentions that the current version of the comment spreadsheet is 11-10-1221r10

· 

·  Santosh suggests policy negotiation, which has proposed resolutions provided/suggested by Santosh

·  Mike says that he will create a new tab J to deposit comments discussed today and that have reached a consensus proposed resolution to be motioned at the January meeting

·  Comment discussion

·  CID 323 – submission required

·  CID 364 - action for Mike and Santosh

·  CID 103 – submission required

·  Mike says he is looking for the first one that is unresolved:

·  CID 401 – Mike reads comment – move to ready for motion tab J

·  CID 79 – Mike will follow up with Michael Barr

·  CID 358 – no objection to proposed resolution – move to tab J – CID 453 deletes this primitive, so resolution should change to cited SAP has been deleted – then move to tab J

·  CID 195 – Mike reads comment, pc, r – no objection to move to tab J

·  CID 77 – Mike reads comment, pc, r – no objection to move to tab J

·  CID 284 – Mike reads comment, pc, r – no objection to move to tab J

·  CID 78 – Mike reads comment, pc, r – propose modification to proposed resolution – Henry thinks that Liwen is correct – change resolution to accept in principle and agree with Liwen’s suggestion and then there is no objection to move to tab J

·  CID 287 – Mike reads comment, pc, r – discussion

·  Henry: corner case exists

·  Santosh: non-AP STA should always have the bit set to 1, because it should always accept a change from the AP

·  Santosh: can non-AP STA change from 1 to 0?

·  Henry: only can have dot11MFQReconfigurationActivated = false in IBSS, right?

·  Santosh: correct

·  Mike: accept in principle?

·  Santosh: yes

·  Matthew: I have a problem with the last paragraph of page 44 – see changes sent to reflector – a non-AP STA has no use of the dot11MFQReconfigurationActivated MIB variable – either get rid of it or make it useful - proposal to change language to make it useful – see 11-10-1221r11 for final version -

·  no objection to move to tab J

·  CID 285 – Mike reads comment, pc, r –

·  Henry: CID 121 went too far

·  Matthew: did not go too far

·  Henry: need to update the changes for CID 121

·  Mike: we have run out of time

·  Mike: We will continue from CID 285 next time

·  Mike adjourns meeting without objection

·  Adjourn until the plenary meeting on July 12.

Wednesday Dec 15

11:00

Attendees:

Mike Montemurro,

Henry Ptasinski,

Matthew Fischer,

Santosh Pandey,

Adrian Stephens.

·  Call to order.

·  No essential patents given.

·  Discussed 1221/r12: comment resolution

·  Draft 1.1 posted

·  Continuing with Policy Negotiation tab

·  CID: 285: already resolved – Comment group K

·  CID 123:

·  AS: no real benefit of probe request

·  MF: no matter who the STA is transmitting to – only use associated

·  AS: not associated then no constraints

·  MF: 11v location track notification will need policy to be applied

·  HP: the sentence should also indicate that after the STA disassociates it should use MFQ default policy

·  Accept in principal – see 1221/r13 resolution to CID 123 – comment group K

·  Check as it required lot of editing

·  CID 124:

·  Mike: will above resolution be solve the problem?

·  MF: other subclauses need to be looked too – 10.ae1.3 – on line D1.0 45.20; Para 3 on 10.ae1.3

·  SP: this sentence indicates that multiple priority definition may be from different MFQ policy element

·  MF: Change line 18 to MFQ Policy element

·  Indicate in this para that the new MFQ policy will replace the old MFQ policy

·  New para – the MFQ STA will revert to default policy when it disassociates with MFQ AP – prob not required as covered in previous subclause.

·  Accept in principal – see 1221/r13 resolution to CID 124 – comment group K

·  CID 286:

·  CID 124 addresses it

·  May not need normative statement in 9.2.4.2 if MFQ STA is defined with dot11MFQImplemented set to true

·  D1.01 – definition change

·  Accept in principal – see 1221/r13 resolution to CID 286 – comment group K

·  Adjourn until the next Teleconference call on Jan 5/11

Wednesday Jan 5

11:00

Attendees:

Mike Montemurro,

Stephen McCann,

Henry Ptasinski,

John Kenney,

Jouni Malinen,

Santosh Pandey,

Adrian Stephens.

·  Call to order.

·  No essential patents given.

·  Going over MLME comments from 1221r14

·  CID 227 duplicate of – 444, 338, 156, 340, 339, 314, 157, 342

·  Accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 444 – reject see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Jouni – request frames do not include MFQ policy only the response frames use it

·  CID 338 – accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Jouni – add comma - required as in CID 227 resolution

·  CID 156 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 340 – accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 339 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Stephen dropped off the teleconference

·  CID 314 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 157 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 342 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Henry – 2 more comment to look at

·  CID 298 and CID 316

·  CID 298 – update resolution to accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 316 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 158 – may be belonging to the same set of group

·  CID 158 - accept in principal see 227 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 229 - CID 344, 318, 302, 367, 229 another group of comment

·  CID 344 – accept in principal CID 452 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 452 already deleted those parameters

·  CID 229 – accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Accept cause the second part is valid

·  Changes the resolution to 215

·  CID 318 – accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 302 - accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 367 - accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  CID 348 – accept see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  MFQ policy element needs to be passed down (even if NULL) to build the frame

·  CID 272 – accept in principal CID 348 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Can’t remove all cited text

·  CID 232 - accept in principal CID 348 see resolution in 1221r15 comment group L

·  Wording in CID 348 better

·  CID 277

·  Section number should be 6.3.ae1.9.2

·  Can we remove this mib variable ?

·  Do we need activated

·  CID 236 has lot to changes to this clause so discussing this first

·  Other comments in this clause that have been applied – probably ok