Hello Mario,
Thanks for your feedback !
Yes, we are using QDIDs 84041 (host) and 84040 (controller).
I checked on Launch Studio, and these QDIDs are well updated (there is no last version, then as we created the project at the end of 2020, we have the last versions).
As ICS topic is very specific to BT protocol stack (then for specialist), I ‘ll try to sum up our BT consultant conclusion and our comments with colors…
New ICS
Supported in original NXP listing
SKF comments
Dependency Invalid
LL > 4.0HCI 15:C.3 | If [LL] (1/5) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (15/2c, 15/4c, and 15/8) are Mandatory (15/2 and 15/4 previously supported, now 15/2c and 15/4c)
LL > 4.0HCI 15:C.3 | If [LL] (1/4) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (15/2c, 15/4c, and 15/8) are Mandatory (15/2 and 15/4 previously supported now 15/2c and 15/4c)
LL > 4.0HCI 16:C.4 | If [LL] (9/1) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (16/32-36, 16/37b, 16/38b, and 16/39) are Mandatory – new ICS added after original listing
LL > 4.0HCI 16:C.7 | If [LL] (9/1 and 9/2) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (16/48b) is Mandatory – new ICS added after original listing
LL > 4.0HCI 5:C.9 | If [LL] is Supported and [LL] (9/13) is Not Supported then [4.0HCI] (5/27-32) are Excluded – can exclude now
LL > 4.0HCI 6:C.9 | If [LL] is Supported and [LL] (9/13) is Not Supported then [4.0HCI] (6/26) is Excluded – can exclude now
LL > 4.0HCI 7:C.10 | If [LL] is Supported and [LL] (9/13) is Not Supported then [4.0HCI] (7/39 and 7/40) are Excluded – can exclude now
LL > 4.0HCI 7:C.24 | If [LL] is Supported and [LL] (9/13 and 5/4) are Not Supported then [4.0HCI] (7/38) is Excluded – can exclude now
LL > 4.0HCI 8:C.3 | If [LL] (1/5) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (8/5b, 8/6, 8/7, and 8/8b) are Mandatory – new ICS added after original listing (8/8 previously supported, now 8/8b)
LL > 4.0HCI 8:C.3 | If [LL] (1/4) and [4.0HCI] (1a/4) are Supported then [4.0HCI] (8/5b, 8/6, 8/7, and 8/8b) are Mandatory - new ICS added after original listing (8/8 previously supported, now 8/8b)
25:C.5 | If [GAP] (5/3 and 25/9) are Supported then [GAP] (25/13) is Mandatory – new ICS added after original listing
35:C.4 | If [GAP] (5/4 and 35/9) are Supported then [GAP] (35/13) is Mandatory– new ICS added after original listing
Any test cases triggered by new ICS will require additional test evidence, NXP would need to provide this by comparing their old Test Plan to a new one with ICS inconsistencies cleared.
Do you think that QDIDs from Q3/2019 (based on TCRL 2018-2) will solve these issues ?
If not, and assuming that NXP will not update KW41 certification, SKF will not pass BT SIG certification.
The next two are related to Core Erratum and need to be fixed.
34:C.9 | If [SUM ICS] (31/17 and 52/1) are Supported then [SUM ICS] (34/15) is Mandatory – this relates to Core Erratum 11838 Key Size Updates. Adopted 13 August 2019 (has to be implemented)
21:C.4 | If [SUM ICS] (21/14) is Supported then [SUM ICS] (21/19) is Mandatory – this relates to Core Erratum 11838 Key Size Updates. Adopted 13 August 2019 (has to be implemented)
Do you think that QDIDs from Q3/2019 (based on TCRL 2018-2) will solve these 2 issues ?
If not, and assuming that NXP will not update KW41 certification, SKF will not pass BT SIG certification.
Thanks for your support !
BRs
Franck