[wi-sun rlmmwg] Changes to RLMM Annex in PHY Specification

[Kunal Shah]

Hi Yamada-san and Ben,

Thank you for your comments.

Yamada-san: Is the proposed change to the resolution is acceptable for RLMM profile, 
"The FCS field in the PHR shall be set to 0 when the frame contains a
4-octet FCS and shall be set to 1 when the frame contains a 2-octet FCS."

Please let me know and I will incorporate the same in the PHY specification.

Regards,
Kunal Shah




On 3/4/16, 9:58 AM, "rlmmwg on behalf of Benjamin A. Rolfe" <rlmmwg-bounces at wi-sun.org on behalf of ben at blindcreek.com> wrote:

>Ryota-san,
>The current text is technically contradictory.  The first sentence 
>"shall be set to 0" precludes generating a frame with FCS field set to 
>1, thus  contradicts the sentence "It can also use 2-octet CRC, in which 
>case, the FCS Type field is set to 1.". This is the problem identified 
>by the commenter (me).  I had inferred the first sentence was correct, 
>which from your explanation (if I understand correctly) was an incorrect 
>conclusion.  I apologize for my confusion.
>I propose the following to reflect that for RLMM  either 2-octet or 
>4-octet FCD may be used:
>
>"The FCS field in the PHR shall be set to 0 when the frame contains a 
>4-octet FCS and shall be set to 1 when the frame contains a 2-octet FCS."
>
>I hope that correctly reflects what you intended.
>
>Regards
>Ben
>
>On 3/3/2016 9:17 PM, Ryota Yamada wrote:
>> Dear Kunal-san,
>>
>> I will put my comments between lines below.
>>
>>
>> On 2016/03/03 8:20, Kunal Shah wrote:
>>> Dear RLMM WG and Yamada-san,
>>>
>>> PHYWG recently gone through the ballot process as part of the PHY
>>> specification and some of the comments received as part of the RLMM
>>> profile Annex.
>>>
>>> One of the comment is to change the support for FCS type sentence.
>>>
>>> Currently the RLMM Annex as part of the PHY specification includes,
>>> "The FCS Type field (in the PHR) shall be set to 0 (4-octet CRC). It can
>>> also use 2-octet CRC, in which case, the FCS Type field is set to 1.”
>>>
>>> Proposed change,
>>> "The FCS Type field (in the PHR) shall be set to 1 (2-octet CRC).
>>> Packets received with the FCS field set to 0 may be discarded.”
>>
>> In RLMM Profile, as a result of the discussion in RLMM WG, both 
>> 2-octet FCS and 4-octet FCS can be supported. When PSDU size is no 
>> more than 255 octets, some devices can use 2-octet FCS. On the other 
>> hand, some other devices can choose to se 4-octet FCS in different 
>> type of network defined in RLMM Profile. Therefore, the proposed 
>> change is not acceptable.
>>
>>
>>> Other editorial changes was proposed to change the sentence from, "This
>>> normative annex specifies PHY requirements for the Wi-SUN RLMM
>>> profile.”, to "This normative annex contains PHY requirements specific
>>> to the Wi-­SUN RLMM profile.”
>>
>> This editorial change seems to be acceptable.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Ryota
>>
>>
>>> I would like to ask the group if the above resolution is acceptable as
>>> shown above. Please let me know of any comments or objections by 4th
>>> March 10PM JST.
>>>
>>> Please let me know of any comments or questions.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kunal Shah
>>> PHYWG Chair
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>rlmmwg mailing list
>rlmmwg at wi-sun.org
>https://lists.wi-sun.org/listinfo/rlmmwg
>
>Copyright (C) 2014 Wi-SUN Alliance. The contents of this email are confidential and may not be disclosed to non-members without prior written consent of an authorised representative of Wi-SUN Alliance.