Speaking as simply a document reviewer, not as an AD:
On 7/26/13 5:31 PM, Vincent Chen wrote:
In that case, I believe the PAWS document should refer to Slave and
Master as roles, and I should not include the last sentence in the
proposed text.
Indeed, that is what RFC 6953 already says:
Master Device: A device that queries the database, on its own behalf
and/or on behalf of a slave device, to obtain available spectrum
information.
Slave Device: A device that queries the database through a master
device.
It is probably worth a "scrub" of the document to make sure the wording
agrees with 6953.
We probably also need to add:
Whether a single device is allowed to serve both Slave and Master
roles depends on regulatory rules.
I think simply saying, "A device can server as a Master, as a Slave, or
both; Slave and Master are simply roles indicating whether or not the
device communicates with the WSDB." is sufficient. As always, I think
there is no need to mention regulatory rules in discussion of protocol
use, except by way of examples.
pr
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Ray Bellis <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 26 Jul 2013, at 15:25, Vincent Chen <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> In the ETSI / OFCOM model, is Slave a "role" or a static /
certified property of the device?
I would tend towards the latter. The ETSI draft standard contains
this definition:
"slave WSD: WSD that is only able to communicate with other WSDs,
when under the control of a master WSD"
and this:
"master WSD: geo-located WSD that is able to communicate directly
with a TVWSDB and with WSDs"
> Consider the use case:
> - A portable device has location capability, but is not yet on
a network
> - It acts like a Slave in this phase to contact a Master in
order to get spectrum
> - It now can establish network connection to the Database
directly using the spectrum
>
> In the ETSI / OFCOM model:
> 1. Can it now ask the Database directly for spectrum? because
it may be able to operate at higher power?
I believe that this is *not* permitted. A slave device that has
geolocation capability MAY ask for device specific RF parameters,
but MUST do so through its Master.
OFCOM's specification explicitly prohibits a (master) WSD from
talking to the WSDB over the managed UHF spectrum, it needs to use
some other form of link.
kind regards,
Ray
--
-vince
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
