Re: [RFA] HE support

On Tue, 2018-02-20 at 06:59 -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> 
> > I think it'd be better to split this:
> > flags1: 0x0080: reserved
> > flags2: 0x0003: bandwidth from bw field in HE-SIG-A with the values
> >                  0 - 20 MHz
> >                  1 - 40 MHz
> >                  2 - 80 MHz
> >                  3 - 160/80+80 MHz
> > flags2: 0x0004: bandwidth from bw field in HE-SIG-A known
> > flags2: 0x0008: preamble puncturing from bw field in HE-SIG-A known
> > flags2: 0x0300: preamble puncturing from bw field in HE-SIG-A,
> >                 with the values
> >                  0 - non-puncturing mode
> >                  1 - punctured secondary 20 MHz
> >                      (in primary 80 MHz if applicable)
> >                      [maps to HE-SIG-A bandwidth values 4 or 6]
> >                  2 - punctured but primary 40 MHz is presented
> >                      (in primary 80 MHz if applicable)
> >                      [maps to HE-SIG-A bandwidth values 5 or 7]
> > 
> > Richard, did you do any work on the HE-MU field yet that would collide
> > with such a change?
> 
> I have, but:
> 
> 1. It's WIP, so it has not been merged yet, and
> 2. It looks like maybe an hour's work at most to fix it.

Ok. Yeah, shouldn't be so hard to fix.

> So, I would say, accuracy is more important.

It's not really *inaccurate* as such, but it seems it'd be easier to
understand - and perhaps some devices would have the bandwidth but not
the puncturing mode available after decoding, for example.

I'll change it like that and resend the whole proposal.

johannes