Some proposed motions for 802.11 HT SG

1. Some proposed motions for 802.11 HT SG Adrian P Stephens adrian.p.stephens@intel.com Intel Corporation Jan 2003 Adrian Stephens, Intel

2. Change 1 • At the end of table 1 add a new row containing the item “HT-Interoperability ## ” • Add a new note: “## The ability that every HT device can communicate with every other HT device using HT modes in the same local area, provided that they operate in the same frequency band. ” Adrian Stephens, Intel

3. Rationale 1 All HT devices should share a common protocol. At this moment, we do not know what bands should be used (frequency agnostic). If 802.11 supports multiple bands, multi-band products are highly likely, but the protocol does not need to mandate this. Adrian Stephens, Intel

4. Motion 1 • Move to amend the proposed section 18 text as follows: • At the end of table 1 add a new row containing the item “HT-Interoperability ## ” • Add a new note: “## The ability that every HT device can communicate with every other HT device using HT modes in the same local area, provided that they operate in the same frequency band. ” Adrian Stephens, Intel

5. Change 2 • At the end of table 1 add a new row containing the item “Configuration Minimality ### ” • Add a new note: “### It is intended that the number of optional features or modes should be minimised.” Adrian Stephens, Intel

6. Rationale 2 We are likely to introduce new mechanisms. We want to minimize the number of possible new configurations (i.e. the number of different PICS responses). This has benefits for reduced complexity, interoperability between HT devices and testing. Adrian Stephens, Intel

7. Motion 2 • Move to amend the proposed section 18 text as follows: • At the end of table 1 add a new row containing the item “Configuration Minimality ### ” • Add a new note: “### It is intended that the number of optional features or modes should be minimised.” Adrian Stephens, Intel

8. Adrian Stephens, Intel