doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 1 TGk LB71 Parallel category comment resolution Simon Black (Nokia)

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 2 Parallel bit only in radio measurement frames Comments Clarify and correct the last sentence of the text describing the parallel bit in – ‘… shall only be set to 1 in measurement report elements …’ Text should refer to request and not report Comments #396, #410, #987 Recommended Resolution Accept #396, #410, #987 The intent of this sentence is to make parallel bit apply to 11k measurements and not 11h when 11h and 11k appear rolled-up. Suggest this intent is clarified by rewording ‘The Parallel bit is not used and shall be set to 0 in elements requesting spectrum management measurement types.’

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 3 Parallel bit in measurement report elements Comments Can parallel bit setting between request and report be different? Is the parallel bit necessary in the report? Incorrect tense used in definition of parallel bit use in measurement report Comments #512, #516, #517, #520, #524, #525, #1004 Recommended Resolution Resolution – Accept #512, #1004, Counter #516, #517, #520, #524, #525 Remove parallel bit from measurement report. Since each measurement includes an actual measurement start time and duration the function adds no value.

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 4 Parallel bit in first, or only element in measurement request frame Comments Use of parallel bit in the first, or only element of a request frame is not defined Description of parallel bit requires that a receiver process the measurement requests in the order that they appear in the frame Comments #397, #398 Recommended Resolution Accept #397, #398 Add text to to set parallel bit to 0 in the first, or only measurement request element in the frame Add text to 11.7 to say that a receiver processes measurements in the order that they appear in the frame.

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 5 Impossible parallel measurements Comments Some measurements cannot be made in parallel, e.g. measurements on different channels Comment #408 Recommended Resolution Accept #408 Add text to return ‘incapable’ if the measuring STA cannot support requested parallel measurements, e.g. due to the measurements being on different channels

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 6 Enable bit is redundant Comments Suggests removing the enable bit since the same functionality can be obtained by using the length field (measurement request is empty for enable use) Comment #399 Recommended Resolution Decline #399 The mechanism being used is from the 11h measurement protocol without change

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 7 No randomization interval Comments Request the addition of text to clarify that Randomization Interval = 0 means that no randomization interval is to be used Comments #62, #426, #955 Recommended Resolution Accept #62, #426, #955 Add text to to clarify that randomization interval = 0 means no randomization interval

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 8 Description of randomization interval in measurement request Comments The phrase ‘desired maximum random delay’ is used in the definition of randomization interval in each measurement request type. The terms desired, maximum and random are incompatible with each other. Put a reference to in all randomization delay references in clause Put a single definition in clause and not one per type. Comments #36, #423, #414 Recommended Resolution Accept #36, #423 –Replace text with ‘Randomization interval specifies the upper bound of the random delay to be used prior to making the measurement in units of TU. See ’ Discuss #414 (editorial). Recommends a single point of definition for common fields. Could restructure to refer to one place – maybe in the first measurement request description. Views?

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 9 Measurement start time Comments Comment #425 –Define a new term ‘measurement start time’ in clause 3 and use for the randomization interval field definition and wherever else in the draft measurement start time is used. Comment #400 –‘Periodic measurements may begin at the indicated start time…’. There is no indicated start time. Recommended Resolution #425 – Decline(?) –Not needed for randomization interval field definition if text proposed in resolution for #36 and #423 accepted. #400 – Accept –Proposed to delete sentence starting ‘Periodic measurements may begin…’ It is sufficient to say that measurements are made over the requested interval (NB text in this area appears to need some editorial work)

doc.: IEEE /1206r0 Submission Oct 2004 Black, NokiaSlide 10 Miscellaneous Comments Comment #65 on –‘It is unclear what is the root cause of the traffic storms and how a randomization interval resolves the problem…’ Comment #406 –Does parallel apply to periodic measurements? If so add text to say so. Comment #996 –What does iteratively mean in ? Recommended Resolution Comment #65- Seek Clarification. – Not sure what commenter desires; more explanation, removal of the concept, …? Comment #406 - Decline(?) –Is it necessary to specify inclusion (what about iterative measurements too)? Suggest that text is inclusive unless it says otherwise? Comment #996- Accept. –Define what is meant by iteratively; suggest that all supported channels are measured in sequence