Update on PAR Comment Resolution Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 September 2016 Update on PAR Comment Resolution Date: 2016-09-12 Authors: Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al. John Doe, Some Company

Authors (cont’d) : September 2016 doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 September 2016 Authors (cont’d) : Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al. John Doe, Some Company

Authors (cont’d) : September 2016 doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 September 2016 Authors (cont’d) : Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al. John Doe, Some Company

Background Comments were categorized in five groups: Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-yy/xxxxr0 September 2016 Background Comments were categorized in five groups: User data Different bands Operation Latency Miscellaneous Resolutions were discussed through email threads, and WUR conference calls. During the Aug 29, 2016 WUR conference call, document 1119r0 was presented, reviewed and feedbacks were collected which are reflected in this document. Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al. John Doe, Some Company

Remedy: run a straw poll to finalize September 2016 Category 1: User data Proposed resolution was to modify as follows: The wake-up packets carry only control information, and they do not carry any user payload data. Three sets of opinions: Remove the user data part: The wake-up packets carry only control information, and they do not carry any user payload data. Keep (only) the user data part: Remove the entire sentence Remedy: run a straw poll to finalize Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

Category 2: Different bands September 2016 Category 2: Different bands Proposed resolution was to modify as follows: This amendment defines operations for 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands. The wake-up packet may be transmitted in the same band or in a different band other that the primary connectivity radio is using. Have consensus on this resolution. There was a question on whether Sub1GHz should be added, which was cleared after pointing that Sub1GHz is already mentioned in the explanatory section Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

Category 3: Operation Proposed resolution was to modify as follows: September 2016 Category 3: Operation Proposed resolution was to modify as follows: The reception of the wake-up packet by the WUR may triggers a transition of the primary connectivity radio (used for transfer of normal 802.11 packets) to come out of  from sleep to normal operation. Have consensus on this resolution with the following change: The reception of the wake-up packet by the WUR can triggers a transition of the primary connectivity radio (used for transfer of normal 802.11 packets) out of from sleep to normal operation. Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

September 2016 Category 4: Latency Resolutions proposed in the email exchange are as follows: 5.5 Need for the Project: … Prolonging the battery lifetime while in some use cases also maintaining low latency becomes an imperative requirement. … Therefore, for the 802.11 standard to be competitive, the IEEE 802.11 WG needs to develop power efficient mechanisms to be used with battery- operated devices while maintaining low latency where it is required. … 8.1 Additional Explanatory Notes (Item Number and Explanation):re 5.2.b In scenarios where low latency is a requirement, tThe WUR should decreases overall power consumption of the STA without significant increase in impact to the latency (relative to the current maximum latency of the nominal duration of one beacon interval, 102.4 ms) in transferring user data packets. Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

Category 5: Miscellaneous September 2016 Category 5: Miscellaneous Proposed resolution was to modify as follows: 5.5 Need for the Project: Change “smart phones” to “smartphones” 8.1 Additional Explanatory Notes (Item Number and Explanation): 5.2.b Add an extra bullet In order to enable a wider set of use cases, both AP and non-AP types of STAs can be equipped with a WUR that can receive wake-up messages. Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

September 2016 Straw Poll 1 Do you agree to remove the user data part in order to have the following text: The wake-up packets carry only control information. Yes: 35 No: 0 Abstain: 24 Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.

Straw Poll 1- alternative September 2016 Straw Poll 1- alternative Which of the following option do you prefer: Remove the user data part: The wake-up packets carry only control information, and they do not carry any user payload data. Keep (only) the user data part: Remove the entire sentence: A: 29 B: 4 C: 10 Abstain: 11 Shahrnaz Azizi, Intel Corporation, et. al.