Docstoc

comments-Roy

Document Sample
comments-Roy Powered By Docstoc
					  Date Name
     Comment Email IndexClassification Page Subclause Line Comment
Comment ID # Phone  Style    # Vote
                                 Category                                                            Must
                                                                                                     Proposed Change
                                                                                                    File Be Satisfied
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       1 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical 2
                    Individual
                           1                      1.6    39 This standard should be written so as    Delete paragraph 1. Add "roadside-to-
                                                                                                     No
                                                            to apply to all communications between roadside" after the first "the" in the first
                                                            any and all devices operating in WAVE sentence in paragraph 3. Change
                                                            mode. Unless there is a valid            paragraph two to read : "This protocol
                                                            TECHNICAL reason for excluding           supports wireless communications betwenn
                                                            some mode of communications, all         any and all devices operating in WAVE
                                                            modes (INCLUDING RSU-to-RSU)             mode. These devices may be, mobile,
                                                            should be included. ANY and ALL          portable or stationary. Relative speeds
                                                            regulatory domain restrictions must be   between transmitteer and receiver of up to
                                                            limited to the appropriate Annexes.      200 km/hr are supported, as are very short
                                                            Furthermore, any mention of              (sub-second) time intervals over which
                                                            communication range and mobile           communications may take place due to RF
                                                            versus stationary is a regulatory issue  coverage restrictions.
                                                            and should be left to the Annexes as
                                                            well.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       2 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           2                          3     1 Capitalization is inconsistent.          Make capitalization consistent. For
                                                                                                       No
                                                                                                       example, "Control Channel" in 3.1.3 shoud
                                                                                                       read: "control channel" and "User" shoud be
                                                                                                       "user".
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       3 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           3                          3     1 "The" should not be the first word in    Change all "The"'s to "A"'s or eliminatge as
                                                                                                       No
                                                              any definition.                          appropriate.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       4 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical 6 3.1.23
                    Individual
                           4                               17 The definition of WBSS is not correct.   Get
                                                                                                       No the 802.11p latest definition and
                                                                                                       replace what's in D21 with it.


# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       5 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           5                 3.1.25        25 There should be no comma in this         Romve the comma.
                                                                                                       No
                                                              sentence. (This is true in many
                                                              sentences throughout the document
                                                              and the editor should read thoroughly
                                                              and remove those that are
                                                              grammatically incorrect like this one.




                                                                                                                                                      1
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       6 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           6                  3.1.27       33 Redundancy is not nice.                       Replace "A collection of data collected by
                                                                                                            No
                                                                                                            the WME" with "A data structure containing
                                                                                                            information that announces the availability
                                                                                                            of a service. A WSIE is composed of such
                                                                                                            structures."
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       7 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           7                  3.1.29            Defining "WAVE Short Message                How
                                                                                                            No about "A protocol for rapid, reliable
                                                                Protocol" as a protocol used for WAVE       exchange of messages in a rapidly-varying
                                                                short messages seems a bit weak.            RF environment where low-latency is also
                                                                Also, why is this the only definition       an important objective.
                                                                that's italicized???
       8 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                           8
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant      9            4    2   Starting a sentence with a number, in       Perhaps "Clause 4.3", or "A description of
                                                                                                            No
                                                                this case "4" is not good practice.         how the & is given in 4.3."
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
       9 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical11 4.2.2
                    Individual
                           9                               54   WAVE does not "provide" two                 Perhaps "WAVE accomodates two protocol
                                                                                                            No
                                                                protocols.                                  stacks:&"
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      10 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 11 4.2.2
                    Individual
                         10                                60   WAVE doesn't control "physical              Change "physical characteristics" to
                                                                                                            No
                                                                characteristics"                            physical layer characteristics".
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      11 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 11 4.2.2
                    Individual
                         11                                65   ", so" should be replaced with "and"        Make it so.
                                                                                                            No
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      12 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical12 4.2.3
                    Individual
                         12                                 7   "periodically visit" is an implementation   Change "periodically vist" to "may use".
                                                                                                            No
                                                                dependent statement and is therefore
                                                                inappropriate.



# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      13 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical12 4.2.3
                    Individual
                         13                                17 "Operation on one WBSS consumes               Remove it.
                                                                                                            No
                                                              the resources of one device PHY." is
                                                              an implementation dependent
                                                              statement and should be removed.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      14 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 12 4.2.4
                    Individual
                         14                                25 Applications don't "operate through           Change the phrase to: "as determined by
                                                                                                            No
                                                              devices".                                     the requesting application." and remove the
                                                                                                            semi-colon.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      15 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 12 4.2.6
                    Individual
                         15                                56 The third sentence is speculative and         Replace it with: "RSUs and OBUs can be
                                                                                                            No
                                                              inappropriate.                                either a provider or a user of services.
                                                                                                            While a unit may switch between being a
                                                                                                            provider and a user of a particular service, it
                                                                                                            can not be both simultaneously."




                                                                                                                                                              2
      16 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical13 4.2.7
                    Individual
                         16
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant                                                                Change "traffic" to "service".
                                                         3 "traffic" channels are not defined. More No
                                                           importantly, this document artificially
                                                           restricts WAVE to two classes of
                                                           channels and it shouldn't. This
                                                           shouldbe fixed in the final version.
                                                           What about "HALL" channels for
                                                           example. They are supposed to be low-
                                                           latency by their very name, and yet a
                                                           WBSS is required before they can be
                                                           used. This should be rethought.
                                                           Multichannel radios are here to stay,
                                                           and 1609.3 shoud not prohibit there
                                                           efficacious use.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      17 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical13 4.2.7
                    Individual
                         17                              8 The fourth sentence in this subclause  Change to read: :Devices participating in a
                                                                                                  No
                                                           is implementation dependent and        WBSS exchange data on the designated
                                                           inappropriate. The compromise 1609.4 SCH for that WBSS.
                                                           makes in order to accommodate single-
                                                           channel radios is that all radios MUST
                                                           listen to the CCH during the CCH
                                                           interval, and MUST Tx safety
                                                           messages during that interval as well.
                                                           How the SCH is handled is
                                                           implementation dependent and MUST
                                                           not be specified in this standard.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      18 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 13
                    Individual
                         18                       4.3   25 This paragraph implies there is a     "The
                                                                                                 No set of channels on which WBSSs may
                                                           difference between the channels on    be initiated is contained oin the WME MIB.
                                                           which an RSU and an OBU may initiate These channels may be dependent upon
                                                           a WBSS. This is SURELY NOT a          the regulatory domain in which the unit is
                                                           standards issue. If anything, it's a  operating."
                                                           regulatory one and SHOULD NOT be
                                                           anywhere but in an Annex dedicated to
                                                           such issues.




                                                                                                                                                3
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      19 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical13
                    Individual
                         19                          4.3   29 "An OBU may initiate a WBSS in the       Either remove the sentence or fix it so it
                                                                                                       No
                                                              channel identified in 6.2 and entered in says what is intended. Since there is no way
                                                              the MIB." Which MIB? Also, 6.2 doesn't to know what the intention is based on the
                                                              seem to say anything about what          rest of the document as far as I can see, I
                                                              channels an OBU may initiate a WBSS can't propose a fix based on intentions
                                                              on??? This needs fixing.                 which are invisible.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      20 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical13 4.3.1
                    Individual
                         20                                49 "either unicast or broadcast addresses"   Add
                                                                                                        No multicast addresses unles they are to
                                                              is stated but it seems that multicast     be explicitly prohibited which I don't believe.
                                                              addresses should be allowed as well.
                                                              This is true in MANY places in the
                                                              document, and this should be checked
                                                              throughout.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      21 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical13 4.3.2
                    Individual
                         21                                60 Transmission of WSAs "each CCH            Change the frequency of persistent WBSS
                                                                                                        No
                                                              interval" is really wasteful and overly   announcement to a MIB parameter and
                                                              restrictive allowing no room for CCH      leave it to the system implementers to set.
                                                              congestion relief & this is a technical
                                                              faux pax.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      22 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 14 4.3.2
                    Individual
                         22                                 1 This sentence is misleading, making it    Change it to read: "This prevents any
                                                                                                        No
                                                              seem as if an OBUs movement               disruption of service provided by the OBU
                                                              "between RSUs" has something to do        as it moves and its coverage area
                                                              with the service being being by the       changes."
                                                              OBU.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      23 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 14 4.3.2.1
                    Individual
                         23                                51 The article "a" is missing before the     Insert the article "a".
                                                                                                        No
                                                              italicized parameters.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      24 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical15 4.3.2.2
                    Individual
                         24                                54 multicast missing issue                   add
                                                                                                        No multicast unless it's expressly
                                                                                                        prohibited
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      25 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical15 4.3.2.2
                    Individual
                         25                                   The option to choose the "best            Add
                                                                                                        No the "use SCH currently in use" option.
                                                              available" channel is included, but not
                                                              the more obvious "use the SCH
                                                              currently in use" option.




                                                                                                                                                          4
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      26 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 15 4.3.2.2
                    Individual
                         26                          61 Suggest rewriting "the receiving            "the
                                                                                                    No receiving
                                                        WME checks whether a provider               WME checks whether any of the provider
                                                        application, defined by PSID in the         applications identified by PSIDs in the WSA
                                                        announcement, is of interest to any         are of interest to any
                                                        locally registered user applications." to   locally registered user applications."
                                                        read &
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      27 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical16 4.3.2.2
                    Individual
                         27                           2 The statement: "i.e., to tune to the        Change to: "and to set lower layer
                                                                                                    No
                                                        correct SCH at the correct time, and to     configuration parameters appropriately to
                                                        set any other lower layer configuration     support communications on the WBSS."
                                                        appropriately to support the
                                                        communications." includes
                                                        implementation dependent language
                                                        which is inappropriate.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      28 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical
                    Individual
                         28                4.3.2.2      A persistent WBSS is announced each         If
                                                                                                    Nothis is a problem, fix it. One solution is to
                                                        CCH. A non-persistent WBSS is               delete persistent and non-persistent and
                                                        announced only upon request of an           replace them with an addition element in
                                                        application and only once per request.      the application registration request dealing
                                                        If a higher or equal priority persistent    with how the application wants the service
                                                        WBSS is "in progress", the non-             to be announced, i.e., once, more than
                                                        persistent WBSS will not get                once, every Nth CCH interval, etc.
                                                        announced ... until the persistent
                                                        WBSS is terminated at a minimum,
                                                        and this might be never. This seems to
                                                        be a problem brought about by an
                                                        artificial segmentation into persistent
                                                        and non-persistent.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      29 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 16
                    Individual
                         29                          12 Replace "the WBSS initiation" with          "WBSS initiation"
                                                                                                    No
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      30 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 16 4.3.2.3
                    Individual
                         30                          19 Change "Any packets received for the        "Any
                                                                                                    No received packets destined for the
                                                        application" to &                           application"




                                                                                                                                                      5
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      31 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical16 4.3.2.4
                    Individual
                         31                            How do persistent WBSSs ever                A
                                                                                                   Noclear statement of how persistent WBSSs
                                                       terminate? WBSSs do not require any         are terminated (assuming they can be by
                                                       applications to be "actively                some mechanism other than a higher
                                                       communicating", ever. It seems the          priority interrupt) should be added to the list
                                                       ONLY way a persistent WBSS is               of reasons for terminating a WBSS.
                                                       terminate is through an interrupt from a
                                                       higher priority application. If this is the
                                                       case, this is clearly a problem for lower
                                                       priority applications since they will
                                                       never get serviced.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      32 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical16 4.3.2.5
                    Individual
                         32                         45 multicast missing issue                     add
                                                                                                   No multicast unless it's expressly
                                                                                                   prohibited
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      33 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical16 4.3.2.5
                    Individual
                         33                            "Since there is no ongoing                  Remove this sentence.
                                                                                                   No
                                                       announcement, new user devices are
                                                       not expected to join the non-persistent
                                                       WBSS throughout its existence." What
                                                       is a "new user device"? If it's a device
                                                       that did not hear the WBSS
                                                       announcement in the first place, how
                                                       would it know about the WBSS it is "not
                                                       expected to join" and why does this
                                                       merit stating in the first place.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      34 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical16 4.3.2.5
                    Individual
                         34                         48 Provider applications don't join            This
                                                                                                   No sentence should be removed as it is
                                                       WBSSs, they initiate them, or become        obvious the intent is that provider
                                                       part of an ongoing announcement             applications can not be added to a non-
                                                       thereof. Users "join" WBSSs                 persistent WBSS announcement once it
                                                       announced by providers. The                 has gone out. Well that seems to be
                                                       statement "New provider applications        obvious since it only goes out once for a
                                                       may not join the WBSS &" is                 non-persistent WBSS. The horse is already
                                                       misleading in two ways. "May not" also      gone ... why are we worried about closing
                                                       implies "may" which is probably not the     the barn doors now.
                                                       intent, and furthermore it implies
                                                       providers "join" which they don't.




                                                                                                                                                     6
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      35 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 17 4.3.3.3
                    Individual
                         35                                43 "There is nothing intrinsically more      "UDP is not intrinsically more efficient than
                                                                                                        No
                                                              efficient about UDP over TCP, it &" is    TCP. It &"
                                                              awkward. Change to: &
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      36 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 17 4.3.3.4
                    Individual
                         36                                55 This protocol applies to more than just   Applications are higher layer entities that
                                                                                                        No
                                                              "intelligent transportation functions".   employ the WAVE communications stack.
                                                              Change: "Applications are the higher
                                                              layer entities that employ the WAVE
                                                              communications stack to provide
                                                              intelligent
                                                              transportation functions." to &
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      37 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical17 4.3.3.4
                    Individual
                         37                                60 The PSC is a needless field in the        In
                                                                                                        No the next version of this standard,
                                                              WSIE and a recipe for abuse.              eliminate the PSC from the WSIE (WSA).

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      38 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                         38                                   Superfluous commas are scattered          Remove superfluous commas.
                                                                                                        No
                                                              throughout the document.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      39 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical18 4.3.4
                    Individual
                         39                                 6 "However, an application cannot act as    Remove the sentence.
                                                                                                        No
                                                              both a user and provider at the same
                                                              point in time." How does an application
                                                              "act" as a provider or a user? The only
                                                              difference between a provider and a
                                                              user is a provider "causes" a WBSS to
                                                              be announced before participating
                                                              while a user simply participates.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      40 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical18
                    Individual
                         40                          4.4    1 Reference is made to "the address of      Clearly state that it is the MAC address of
                                                                                                        No
                                                              the RSU" without ever defining which      the RSU if that's indeed what is intended.
                                                              address is meant.




# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      41 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 18
                    Individual
                         41                          4.4    1 In referring to the rows of Table 1,      Use
                                                                                                        No the word "scenario" instead.
                                                              "example" is used consistently to refer
                                                              to the various scenarios described in
                                                              the Table.




                                                                                                                                                        7
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      42 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical19
                    Individual
                         42                  4.4    1 RSU-RSU is missing from scenario 1        Add
                                                                                                No RSU-RSU to scenario 1. Add it to the
                                                      "No DS".                                  text that follows the Table as well.




# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      43 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 19
                    Individual
                         43                  4.4   25 "The first scenario is &" should read &   "The
                                                                                                No first scenario involves &"

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      44 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical19
                    Individual
                         44                  4.4                                                In
                                                    1 When an OBU or an RSU is performing No all cases involving portals, be specific
                                                      routing functions, i.e., acting as a      about which MAC address in the RSU or
                                                      portal, it has more than one MAC          OBU is intended.
                                                      address potentially, i.e., a MAC
                                                      address for it's WAVE device and a
                                                      MAC address for it's ethernet
                                                      controller. Stating that a field shall be
                                                      "the MAC address of the OBU" is not
                                                      well enough specified.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      45 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical19
                    Individual
                         45                  4.4   51 "Any responding device (here an OBU) No   Remove this introductory clause to the
                                                      replies to the MAC address of the         sentence.
                                                      announcing device, &" is in direct
                                                      conflict with the statement that no over-
                                                      the-air exchanges are required to set
                                                      up WBSSs.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      46 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical20
                    Individual
                         46                  4.4    1 This figure implies that the first       Change the figure to indicate the WSA goes
                                                                                               No
                                                      communication in a WBSS comes from out on a CCH, and then have only one
                                                      the user, in this case the OBU in Figure double-headed arrow connecting the RSU
                                                      6. Why? It's not required, furthermore   to the OBU and clearly indicate that all
                                                      the figure seems to imply that these     these exchanges are on a SCH.
                                                      transactions take place sequentially on
                                                      the same channel.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      47 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical22
                    Individual
                         47                   5    10 "vehicular" should read &                 "mobile" so that it's clear this applies to
                                                                                                No
                                                                                                more than cars.




                                                                                                                                              8
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      48 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical22
                    Individual
                         48                   5    12 "carrier channel" is not defined.            Change it to: "service channel".
                                                                                                   No



# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      49 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 22
                    Individual
                         49                    5   15 Is "Clause 7" correct.                       If
                                                                                                   Nonot, fix it as appropriate.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      50 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical22
                    Individual
                         50                  5.5   55 multicast missing issue                      add
                                                                                                   No multicast if appropriate
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      51 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical22
                    Individual
                         51                  5.5   59 This line implies that a "forwarding         Add
                                                                                                   No the specification, remove the sentence,
                                                      function is specified" in this document,     or change the sentence appropriately.
                                                      but I can't find any specification of one.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      52 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical23
                    Individual
                         52                  5.5                                            If
                                                    2 The word "shall" seems to mandate the Nothis is the case, then change "shall pass"
                                                      use of DL-UNITDATA primitives. I      to "passes".
                                                      thought the standard was supposed to
                                                      steer clear of mandating the use of
                                                      primitives.


# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      53 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical23
                    Individual
                         53                  5.5                                                Fix
                                                    7 This sentence implies that a destination No this here and elsewhere in the
                                                      application must register as a user       document where this occurs such as the
                                                      application to get a                      bulleted items in 6.1.
                                                      WaveShortMessage.indication. And in
                                                      the second sentence it says an
                                                      "application may need to be
                                                      registered"? Tis is confusing.
                                                      Furthermore, what happens if the unit
                                                      is a provider? According to the
                                                      standard it can't be registered as both a
                                                      provider and a user simultaneously, yet
                                                      in places such as this, the standard
                                                      seems to contradict itself by requiring a
                                                      provider app to also register as a user.




                                                                                                                                                9
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      54 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical23
                    Individual
                         54                          6.1                                              Fix
                                                           27 According to this sentence, WSMs may No the contradictions in this section as
                                                              be sent and received by "unregistered   intended, either registration is requireed, or
                                                              applications", yet the bulleted items   it isn't. It can NOT be both.
                                                              below specifically contradict this by
                                                              stating "Applications shall also be
                                                              registered as a provider before sending
                                                              a WSM."

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      55 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical23
                    Individual
                         55                          6.1   44 "Applications shall aslo be registered Remove this sentence.
                                                                                                     No
                                                              as a user before receiving a WSM.",
                                                              the previous comment notwithstanding,
                                                              is vacuous, unreasonable and
                                                              untestable as a requirement.

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      56 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical24
                    Individual
                         56                          6.2   31 "via the received WSA" seems to imply     Change "the received WSA" to "a WSA
                                                                                                        No
                                                              reception over the air, when what is      request"
                                                              intended I believe is the receipt of a
                                                              WSA request to send.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      57 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical26 6.2.1.1
                    Individual
                         57                                 2 Shouldn't "MAC" read "MLME"?              If
                                                                                                        Noso, make the change.
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      58 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical26 6.2.1.1
                    Individual
                         58                                 1 "shall" mandates a primitive here in      If
                                                                                                        Nothis is not intended, change "shall
                                                              several places.                           generate" to "generates".
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      59 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 26 6.2.1.1
                    Individual
                         59                                11 "stops" should read &                     "stop"
                                                                                                        No
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      60 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical26 6.2.1.1
                    Individual
                         60                                 1 Non-persistent WBSS requests of           Add
                                                                                                        No some mechanism to prevent a low
                                                              priority lower than a persistent WBSS     priority non-persistent WBSS request from
                                                              currently being offered will be forever   continually being sent and failing.
                                                              rejected. How will a non-persistent
                                                              WBSS requester know to stop its futile
                                                              attempt to send an announcement?
                                                              Why should it be futile (See above
                                                              comments on persistent versus non-
                                                              persistent WBSS announcements.)?

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      61 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial 26 6.2.1.1.1
                    Individual
                         61                                53 "frequency of operation" should read &    "channel of operation"
                                                                                                        No




                                                                                                                                                       10
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      62 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical26 6.2.1.1.1
                    Individual
                         62                           57 The choice of "channel that has least    Replace this requirement to do something
                                                                                                  No
                                                         recently been received in a WSA" is not technically unsound, with the option to "use
                                                         a technically sound way of choosing a    the SCH currently being used if there is one
                                                         SCH since there is no direct correlation such".
                                                         between the announcement of othe
                                                         possibility of communicating on a
                                                         particular SCH and the actual
                                                         communication thereon. Sectgion 6.3
                                                         should be removed as well since it is a
                                                         provably unsound technique for
                                                         congestion control and/or efficient
                                                         spectrum utilization.

      63 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical27 6.2.1.1.1
                    Individual
                         63
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant                                                              See
                                                      13 A persistent WBSS is announced each No previous similar comments and their
                                                         CCH interval. What prevents an           solutions.
                                                         application from announcing its
                                                         presence forever. For example, "I offer
                                                         internet connectivity to anyone in range
                                                         who wants it". Why would this
                                                         application ever cease announcing it's
                                                         presence, and if it never does cease,
                                                         when do other apps get a chance?

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      64 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical31 6.2.2.1
                    Individual
                         64                           53 Add "use SCH of WBSS currently           Add
                                                                                                  No "use SCH of WBSS currently being
                                                         being announced" & see above similar     announced" & see above similar comments.
                                                         comments.




                                                                                                                                                 11
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      65 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical33 6.2.3.2
                    Individual
                         65                               32 "used in synchronizing channel             "used in coordination of SCH data
                                                                                                        No
                                                             switching buy the MAC" must be             exchanges."
                                                             changed to &




      66 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Editorial
                    Individual
                         66
# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant                                                              Make the terminology consistent throughout
                                                             "ending" and "completing" a WBSS are No
                                                             used throughout while the section    & suggest using "terminate" everywhere
                                                             headers read "termination".          instead of "end" or "complete".

# 02/02/2007 04:07:15 EST Consultant
      67 ROY,dickroy@alum.mit.edu
               III, RICHARD HApprove
                 650-861-3351 Technical36
                    Individual
                         67                         6.3    1 This section should be removed. It has     Remove this section.
                                                                                                        No
                                                             inappropriate references to regulatory
                                                             domain information that does not
                                                             belong anywhere outside of the
                                                             annexes, and furthermore, this
                                                             technique for efficient spectrum
                                                             utilization is not technically sound and
                                                             will not work.




                                                                                                                                               12
Proposed Resolution               Group consensus                Other1   Other2   Other3
The proposed change seems fine to Reword paragraph to remove
me.                               specifics of types of comm:
                                  OBU-OBU, RSU-RSU, etc.
                                  Make sure it's compatible with
                                  802.11p. Remove comm
                                  range details. Accept Dick's
                                  changes to para 2. Fix typos.




OK                                 Use the 11p definition with one
                                   change: "one or more users"
                                   to "zero or more users".




                                                                                            13
OK




Change "periodically visit the        Delete last sentence of 1st
designated SCH in order to            para of 4.2.3. Replace "WSM"
exchange data" to "may access the     in previous sentence with
designated SCH, which is available    "WSMs".
on a periodic basis, to exchange
data."
OK. This sentence is not
appropriate in this document in any
case.




                                                                     14
OK. I don't find any other instances Add to V2 list the concept of
of this incorrect term.              channel classes. (Dick to
                                     draft.)




OK




                                                                     15
Change "MIB" to "WME MIB".
Change "6.2" to "6.3".




There is no multicast MAC address, For V2, harmonize use of
only broadcast and unicast.        multi/broad/group addressing
                                   terms.



Should be a V2 issue.                 Change "each CCH interval" to
                                      "during CCH intervals." Note
                                      impact to Dot4 as well.




See #20.

We have another facility to add       Dick will reconsider.
services to an existing WBSS. This
clause deals with WBSS initiation,
so I don't see that "SCH currently in
use" is meaningful. If there is a new
feature needed, add it to V2.




                                                                      16
OK




For discussion as a V2   Identified problem can be
enhancement.             solved by implementation. No
                         V2 enhancement needed.




                                                        17
There are three reasons listed in this In 4.2.3.4, last bullet, say this
subclause for WBSS termination. I only applies to Users.
don't see the problem.




See #20.

I think the statement can remain.     change "new User devices" to
Perhaps it is obvious to some, but it "User devices that did not
may not be obvious to all. There      receive the announcement"
should be no harm in retaining it.




Change the sentence to "There is no
facility for provider applications to be
added to a non-persistent WBSS
once it has been initiated."




                                                                           18
V2 discussion item.




OK




Add to the end of the first sentence
in 4.4: "All addresses mentioned in
this subclause are MAC addresses.
For OBU and RSU all addresses
mentioned in this subclause are
WAVE MAC address."




                                       19
We have defined no                         Add text to 4.4: "RSU to RSU
communications for RSU-RSU. I              communication is not
prefer to leave that as a V2 item          prohibited by this standard
rather than try to insert it now without   though it is not explicitly
time to fully consider the implictions.    discussed in this clause."
                                           Change "ack" to
                                           "acknowledgment" throughout.



See #40.




Change the sentence to "Any
packets sent in response to the
announcing device carry the address
of the responder. After this
exchange, packets can be
addressed with unicast addresses in
both directions."
Combining the Data arrows into one
removes our ability to show the use
of the Address fields, which is the
point of the figure. Suggest adding a
fourth column to indicate Channel
(CCH | SCH | SCH ).


OK by me, but the name of the
standard is "WAVE".




                                                                          20
Change "carrier channel" to "radio
channel to be used for transmission"
(since it could be CCH or SCH).


See #20.
Replace "herein" with "in the
following paragraphs".


The prmitive itself is implementation
dependent. However, the action on
the part of WSMP, i.e., delivery of
the data, is required. I prefer the
current wording, but am open to
suggestions.

Yes. I think we fixed all these in the
subsequent reviews.




                                         21
See #53.




See #53.




OK



OK
See #52.


Perhaps want queueing of WBSS   Covered by previous
requests? Suggest as a V2       discussion.
enhancement.




                                                      22
The current rudimentary channel
usage monitoring algorithm was
agreed as a placeholder for a more
intelligent mechanism that is under
study for V2.




Note that multiple applications can
share a WBSS. If the service is
eternaly present (e.g., Inernet
access at an RSU) why shouldn't it
continue to advertise it? Suggest
adding the subject for V2 study.




We could add a new code to the
ChannelSelection parameter. I
recommend against it at this time.
First, we would have to be very
careful that the change is made
consistently throughout. Second,
the new code only adds a shortcut in
inter-layer comunications, no new
functionality. Finally, the parameter
exists only in non-mandatory
primatives, so implemntors can
implement the shortcut if they wish,
without it appearing in the standard.




                                        23
I don't see that the proposed change Remove "in synchronizing
better represents how "source timing channel switching"
information" is used. Basically we
want to validate the sender so that
the MAC is safe in evaluating the
timing info in the received
transmission for possible use in
updating its own clock.




See #62 for response on channel         Rewrite 6.3 to identify the
usage monitoring. I agree the list of   algorith as an example, rather
channels is probably in appropriate     than the required algorithm.
here, but that is the language          Remove channel identification
specifically agrre by the WG in an
earlier session.




                                                                         24

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:16
posted:4/25/2010
language:English
pages:24