Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-11-ARC] Presentation to WG on MIB attributes usage pattern, at F2F

--- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 ARC Reflector --- Hello Mark,

Thanks for doing this work.  We can review the agenda on Monday and discuss a motion.
My thinking is this goes into the MDR,  so it is the MDR process that needs approval.   It certainly needs
discussion in the editors' meeting, because they are the people doing the MDR.  Can you come along on
tuesday and discuss process?

We do have some MIB tests in the current MDR.   We need to determine whether these need to be updated
or replaced.

We could have a motion such as:
"The 802.11 Working Group approves the use of document <ref> as part of it mandatory draft review (MDR)
Best Regards,

Adrian Stephens
IEEE 802.11 Working Group Chair
mailto: adrian.p.stephens@xxxxxxxx
Phone: +1 (971) 203-2032
Phone: +447342178905
Skype: adrian_stephens
On 05/01/2018 22:39, Mark Hamilton wrote:



Recall that the plan is to present our recommendations on the MIB attribute usage patterns to the Working Group during a plenary slot at the upcoming face-to-face session.


I have reviewed and fixed a couple very minor typos/editing in document:, which represents our approved recommendations to the WG.


I have also produced:, which is a PPT presentation to give an overview to the WG of what we have been trying to accomplish, and why they should have interest (and hopefully approve) our recommendations.


In talking to Adrian about this, I think the right conclusion is to have these recommendations become part of the MDR process for all new amendments.  What to do for the baseline, or any amendments already through MDR (including 11ai, and 11ah, let alone ones still in flight such as 11aj, 11ak, 11aq, etc.), we’ll need to discuss and probably pass to REVmd for any final disposition.


Please review the presentation deck (11-18/0052) – I welcome any comments.  Note that I tried a little bit to make it less dry and a bit more engaging, by giving the audience some “tests” to think through during the presentation.  We’ll see if that helps…


@Adrian: I assume we want to end with a WG motion, to approve the recommendations?  I left a placeholder on the last slide for that, but haven’t crafted the motion yet.  If you confirm that is the intent, I’ll do that and post an update.


Thanks. Mark