November 2005 doc.: IEEE 802.11-05/1038r2
IEEE P802.11
Wireless LANs
Date: 2005-11-07
Author(s):
Name / Company / Address / Phone / email
Michael Montemurro / Chantry Networks / 1900 Minnesota Cr, Suite 125. Mississauga, ON. L5N 3C9 / 905-363-6413 /
Wednesday October 12, 2005
11:00am
Attendees:
Clint Chaplin,
Michael Montemurro,
Bill Marshall,
Tony Brascich,
Chris Durand,
Nancy Cam-Winget,
Kapil Sood,
Jon Edney,
Frank Ciotti.
· Call to order
· Review of IEEE Intellectual Property Policy
· There were 435 comments from the internal review that are included in document 11-05/1037r3.
· Discussion of Document 11-05/1037r3 for comment resolution:
· Bill Marshall has grouped together the editorial comments and proposed resolutions in the comment document. He will prepare a submission to address these comments at the November plenary session.
· The comments discussed are 41, 170, 172, 196, 191, 195, 197, 219, 237
· The comment resolutions will be captured in Document 11-05/1037r4
· The next teleconference will pick up at comment 239.
· We should encourage using the reflector to address comment “2” issues.
· Adjourn until the teleconference on October 26.
Wednesday October 26, 2005
11:00am
Attendees:
Clint Chaplin,
Michael Montemurro,
Bill Marshall,
Donald Eastlake,
Ed Reuss,
Dorothy Stanley,
Kapil Sood,
Frank Ciotti,
Jon Edney,
Fred Haisch
· Call to order
· Review of IEEE Intellectual Property Policy
· Discussion on Internal Review comments in Document 11-05/1037r05:
· Michael Montemurro will prepare a submission which will address the use of both the BSSID of the TAP and the MAC address of the STA in the Resource Request/Response Action Frames.
· Kapil Sood will prepare a submission that addresses the use of the NAS Identifier.
· The RADIUS client and the Authenticator must be in the same location according to the EAP-Keying draft in the IETF.
· The NAS-ID cannot be used to represent both the R0-Key-Holder and R1-Key-Holder.
· The naming of the security entities in the FT solution will be discussed in the November plenary meeting.
· The definitions of the security entities have been define and were discussed in July. Document 11-05/746r0 defines these terms.
· The definition of multiple security domains within a mobility domain will be discussed at the November plenary session.
· In comment 270 and 344, the word support should be changed to “reachable”.
· The “over-the-DS” and “over-the-air” mechanisms are mandatory for support in the base mechanism.
· In the base mechanism, the messages over the DS are transmitted through the Remote Request Broker (RRB) entity.
· The R0KH needs to generate PMKr1 and transmit them to the R1KH. How does the R0KH know which R1KH to transmit keys?
· The R1KH mapping to R0KH is out-of-scope of this PAR.
· The Remote Request Broker will be discussed on the next teleconference call.
· The comments discussed were: 3, 42, 43, 66, 80, 84, 193, 194, 199, 200, 205, 206, 209, 213, 214, 219, 270, 317, 324, 330, 333, 336, 337, 342, 344, 346, 349, 388, 402, 406, 411, 423, 424, 425, 426, 427, 428,
· The comments document will be updated as Document 11-05/1037r6.
· Adjourn until the teleconference call on November 9.
Wednesday November 7, 2005
11:00am
Attendees:
Clint Chaplin,
Michael Montemurro,
Tony Brascich,
Bill Marshall,
Jon Edney,
Kapil Sood,
Fred Haisch,
Frank Ciotti.
· Call to order
· Review of IEEE Intellectual Property Policy
· Discussion on the TGr To-Do list, Document 11-05/853r7
· Frank Ciotti and Nancy Cam-Winget are working on the MIB
· Michael Montemurro will make sure that there are no occurrences of RR SAP in the 802.11r draft.
· Nancy Cam-Winget, Kapil Sood, and Jesse Walker made a submission to address reply counters.
· There is currently no resolution to the connection state machine updates for First Contact.
· The diagrams in clause 8, 121C, 121D, 121E, 121F need to be updated to reflect the text. Kapil will make a motion at the next meeting.
· There is currently no resolution to the issue of reassociated back to the same AP.
· We need to have text ready to go, modifying the neighbour report that can be submitted once IEEE 802.11k is reviewed.
· There are three choices to address comment 320: Remove the text, leave the text, or re-write the text. We can discuss this at the next meeting.
· The to-do list will be updated as Document 11-05/853r8
· There is no discussion on the latest version of the comments document.
· We may not need the entire TGr adhoc meeting time as we have made sufficient progress until now.
· Clint Chaplin will determine whether we need 3 hours of an adhoc session.
· Adjourn until the November plenary session.
Submission page 4 Michael Montemurro, Chantry Networks