Support subfield equal to 1." items which are relevant to this amendment, but the inclusion of such a partial list might give some readers the impression that other reasons that arise from other subclaues in the specification might therefore be exempt from the action described here. 5024 289.28 9.42a.3 "If the TWT responding STA has already transmitted a non-zero Next TWT Info/Suspend Duration field ....., the TWT responding STA may respond to the STA with a frame that contains a Next TWT Info/Suspend Duration field." is not clear enough. Append "Even" as "Even if the TWT responding STA has already transmitted a non-zero Next TWT Info/Suspend Duration field ..., the TWT responding STA may respond .... field." Reject – the commenter’s suggestion is to add an adverb will change the language from being purely descriptive to a more editorial form by unnecessarily emphasizing the stipulated condition. E.g. why does “even” not appear in all instances of “if” that are followed by a clause that includes a normative verb? Which ones should include it and which should not? 5037 MARC 304.02 9.42f "(short) beacon interval" -- using this wording seems to require to introduce a new abbreviation which could easily be avoided by using "short beacon interval or beacon interval". This would alse prevent the use of parenthathes. Replace "(short) beacon interval" with "short beacon interval or beacon interval" Reject – the current form is more compact and satisfies the larger number of voters and is nothing wrong with adding an abbreviation – we have a subclause dedicated for that very purpose. 5038 MARC 304.03 9.42f "(short) beacon interval" -- using this wording seems to require to introduce a new abbreviation which could easily be avoided by using "short beacon interval or beacon interval". This would alse prevent the use of parenthathes. Replace "(short) beacon interval" with "short beacon interval or beacon interval" Reject – the current form is more compact and satisfies the larger number of voters and there is nothing wrong with adding an abbreviation – we have a subclause dedicated for that very purpose.
headings that include CID 5185. 5186 Liwen Chu 144.44 8.4.2.170j "TWT group parameters that are different from ... TWT parameters" Which one is really talking about TWT group parameters or TWT parameters? Clarify it. Reject – requesting STA never requests TWT group parameters, but response can use TWT group parameters. 5187 Chu 144.50 8.4.2.170j Why is the suggested/demanded parameter only TWT value and the responder needs to accept a set of parameters? Make the of parameters same as the accepted parameters. Revise – generally agree with commenter, TGah editor to execute proposed changes found in document under all headings that include CID 5187. 5190 Liwen Chu 161.40 8.4.2.170l "...after the transmission of the Beacon frame containing the SST element." The decoding of element is higher MAC layer. STAs do not know SST element right after Beacon carrying SST element. Always use Start Time subfield. Reject – how long does it take to decode the element? are many “correct” answers to this question and the commenter has not provided even one answer to the question, so it is impossible to know what minimum Start Time value should be mandated. Furthermore, it is possible for any STA interested in the sounding to simply stay awake immediately after the Beacon in case sounding starts and during the sounding, the element decoding can proceed. 5191 Liwen Chu 161.01 8.4.2.170l "...at the end of the transmission of the frame containing the SST element" The decoding of element is higher MAC layer. STAs do not know SST element right after the frame containing the SST element. Always use Start Time subfield. Reject – how long does it take to decode the element? There are many “correct” answers to this question and the commenter has not provided even one answer to the question, so it is impossible to know what minimum Start Time value should be mandated. Furthermore, it is possible for any STA interested in the sounding to simply stay awake
immediately after the Beacon in case sounding starts and during the sounding, the element decoding can proceed. 5258 Alfred 145.36 8.4.2.170j Please replace STA" with "TWT requesting STA" throughout the draft to keep consistency. As in comment. Accept 5259 Alfred 146.10 8.4.2.170j The "Zero Offset of subfield is optional. So replace "48" with "0 or 48". As in comment. Revise – generally with commenter, TGah editor to execute proposed changes found in document under all headings that include CID 5259. 5260 Alfred 147.33 8.4.2.170j Is the frame exchange expected to be completed during one TWT SP? Also I have noticed the use of "TWT ID", "Flow Identifier", "TWT Flow ID" and "TWT Flow Identifier", and TWT Identifier" likely for the same parameter. Possibly replace all of these terms with "TWT Flow Identifier" throughout the draft. Including when used in plural. As in comment. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter and the commeter is to note that the frame exchange is expected to be completed during one TWT SP, if not, then the flow will fall behind and fail. 5261 Alfred 147.49 8.4.2.170j The bit in the bitmap can correspond to one minimum width channel from the enabled SST subchannels in the SST BSS as well. Replace " BSS" with "BSS or SST BSS" here and in the next line. As in comment. Reject – an SST BSS is a BSS and therefore is already included in the term “BSS”. 5262 Alfred 148.01 8.4.2.170j Only an AP can schedule RAWs. But this condition that was present in D2.0 is not present in D3.0. Insert " that is an AP" immediately after "TWT responding STA". As in comment. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes in document under all headings that include CID 5262.
5263 Alfred 148.27 8.4.2.170j Minor clarification: Replace "Max NDP Paging period" with "Max NDP Paging Period field". Also TWT interval does not appear anywhere else in the draft. I think this refers to "TWT Wake Interval". So replace "TWT interval" with TWT Wake Interval". As in comment. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes in document under all headings that include CID 5263. 5264 Alfred 148.48 8.4.2.170j This table lists actions and for value 2 and 3 it the wording can be inline with the other values (and the NDP Paging procedure subclause) by replacing "STA" with "Wake up". Also in P148L64 it is not needed to specify that the Bits 30-31 are reserved as this is already shown in figure 8-575a24. So remove the sentence in P148L64. As in comment. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes found in document under all headings that include CID 5264. 5272 Alfred 181.22 8.4.2.170y There is no need to specify that the Reserved field is 4 bits. Similarly there is no need to say what is the bit length of the fields. The figure already shows that. Remove this sentence. Also remove any occurrence of "is x bits and" from this subclause. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter. 5302 Alfred 286.17 9.42a.1 The subfield in the S1G Capabilities element is called "TWT Responder Support". Please replace "TWT Responder" with "TWT Responder Support". Idem for replacing "TWT responder Support" with TWT Responder Support" throughout the Another clarification in the paragraph that follows in P286L23: it is confusing to say " a STA with which it is associated" because the STA is associated with the AP not the other way around. So replace "with which it is associated" with "that is associated to the AP". As in comment. Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter.
5447 Hunter 160.05 8.4.2.170l The fragment "bitmap indicating on which channels there is expected or permitted to be transmission activity at a given time", which is in the definitions clause 8, is confusing but also contains a veiled requirement. "Permit" is allowed in a definition when the definition is for a term that means some other entity is permitting, or not, a certain action. However, in this case the defined term might directly control allowed activity. Also: the "expected or permitted" makes the definition vague at best -- which is it? Do the bits indicate expecctations or specify permissions? Replace "or permitted" with "or permitted by the AP". Also, for clarity, replace "indiicating on which channels there is expected or permitted to be transmission activity at a given time" with "indicating on whiich channels transmission is either expected or permitted by the AP during a given time period". Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter. 5448 David Hunter 160.18 8.4.2.170l The fragment "to indicate that STAs associated with the SST AP that transmits the SST element are permitted to transmit frames" is ambiguous about what is doing the indicated permitting. Replace "to indicate that STAs associated with the SST AP that transmits the SST element are permitted to transmit frames" with "to indicate that the SST AP (that transmits the SST element) permits the STAs associated with it to transmit frames". Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter. 5449 David Hunter 160.30 8.4.2.170l The fragment "indicates the maximum permitted PPDU bandwidth for a transmission on the indicated channel" is ambiguous as to whether the indicated permission is a matter of regulation, definition of MCS, limit of each STA, or what. Replace "indicates the maximum permitted PPDU bandwidth for a transmission on the indicated channel" with "indicates the maximum PPDU bandwidth permitted by the AP for a transmission on the indicated channel". Accept – TGah editor to execute proposed changes provided by the commenter.