On 28/02/2014 5:58 AM, Liu Dapeng wrote:
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your review.
2014-02-28 5:47 GMT+08:00 Tom Taylor <[email protected]>:
Numerous grammatical and stylistic suggestions that I gave you in my first
review haven't made it into the revision, so I won't bother with any more.
I searched the mailing list and can not find your "grammatical and
stylistic suggestions" comments. Do you mind to give me a pointer?
[PTT] Sorry, I sent it to you privately as a marked-up .docx on 7 Nov
2013. It's only 19 kB, so I suppose I could send it to the list too, or
just resend it. Alternatively I could work directly on something you
send me. Let me know.
However, there are still points where the intention isn't clear and the
text needs to be tightened up.
Section 4.1.2 regarding antenna configuration:
----------------------------------------------
I don't understand the explanation of this field. It says each bit
represents the number of antennas corresponding to that bit. Taking that
literally, I could see 1+2+...+8 = a total of 36 antennas being configured.
Is this what you mean, or do you mean that there are eight antennas, each
bit corresponds to one of them, and the bits determine which of those eight
antennas are enabled?
It is the latter case, only eight antennas.
How about adding the following sentence for clarification:
"Only one bit is allowed to be set to 1."
[PTT] If that is so, why do you need 8 bits and not just 3 (if you
number the antennas starting from 0)? Are you sure this isn't a matter
of configuring a specific set of antennas, so that multiple bits can be
set? For example, 10010000 enables antennas 8 and 5 and disables the rest?
Section 5.1 first paragraph:
----------------------------
Currently says: "... if those information element is zero ..."
Do you mean that literally (I haven't looked those information elements
up), or do you mean: "... if those information elements are not present
..."?
It should be the channel field of those information element. How about the
following sentence?
"If the channel field of those information element is set to 0"
Section 5.3 explanation of scanning procedure:
----------------------------------------------
Do the three parameters that determine scan operation apply to both
passive and active scanning, or just to active scanning? I can get the
answer by looking in Section 5.3.1, but it wouldn't hurt to say it here.
OK, how about adding a sentence after the first sentence in page 9:
There are three parameters that will determine the working mode of
scan: PrimeChlSrvTime, On Channel ScanTime, Off Channel ScanTime. It
applies to both active and passive scan.
[PTT] I believe the definitions of the On and Off Channel Scan Time
parameters say that they apply to active mode only.
Section 5.3.1 Scan Parameter message element:
---------------------------------------------
The M and S bits are described as having values 1 or 2, but are only one
bit wide. They should be 0 or 1.
Yes. I will change its values to 0 and 1.
You probably mean to designate that M bit is "WTP oper mode", not "AP oper
mode".
Yes, I will change the "AP" to "WTP".
You may want to specify what L=0 and D=0 mean.
I will add the following:
L=0: Disable Load Balance Scan.
D=0: Disable Rouge WTP detection scan.
5.3.4. Neighbor WTP Report:
---------------------------
You should probably use phrasing similar to that of Section 4.1.1 to
specify transport of the Neighbor Report Element in the 802.11 Information
Element, rather than talking about a new message type.
OK. How about changing it to the following:
This document specifies use of the IEEE 802.11 Information Element (Type
1029) that defined in section 6.6 of RFC5416 and IEEE 802.11 Neighbor
Report Element that defined in section 8.4.2.39 of IEEE-802.11.2012 to
carry the neighbor WTP report message.
[PTT] The point is that there is no such thing as the neighbour WTP
report message. The sentence should be:
"This document specifies use of the IEEE 802.11 Information Element
(Type 1029) defined in section 6.6 of RFC5416 to carry the IEEE 802.11
Neighbor Report Element defined in section 8.4.2.39 of
[IEEE-802.11.2012], possibly along with other IEEE 802.11 elements."
Cheers,
Dapeng Liu
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
