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

RE: [802.21] Letter Ballot #1 Voting Reminder



Thanx Roger, Brian and Phil for these insights.

The first 802.21 WG draft was produced in July 2005 meeting (after completion of down selection and confirmation vote activities in the May 2005 meeting). So, we have spent a fair bit of time (almost a year!) resolving WG comments already, prior to the start of the WG LB process. We shall definitely try to achieve the high level of Approval standards set by other IEEE groups such as 802.16.

Best Regards
-Vivek

> -----Original Message-----
> From: stds-802-21@ieee.org [mailto:stds-802-21@ieee.org] On Behalf Of
> Roger B. Marks
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:48 AM
> To: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: RE: [802.21] Letter Ballot #1 Voting Reminder
> 
> A high approval rate is not a condition to close
> the ballot. If the rate is over 75%, then you
> have met the approval criterion. The additional
> recircs are done not to improve the approval
> ratio but to clear the comments, by recirculating
> the changes and the rebuttals. If the WG makes
> changes to resolve comments, then they open the
> door to new comments on the changed material. As
> long as the WG keeps accepting comments, it
> invites new comments and further recirculations.
> If a recirc includes rebuttals but few or no
> changes, that's a good sign that the WG believes
> that the document is mature. At this point,
> closure of the ballot is imminent because,
> without changes to respond to, few new comments
> are likely to arise.
> 
> At this stage, the approval ratio is typically
> well over 75%. However, that's not necessary.
> 
> Roger
> 
> 
> At 05:35 PM -0400 06/04/25, Kiernan, Brian G. wrote:
> >I can't swear to 96% on all the 802.16 ballots, but it sounds about right.
> >
> >With 802.16a, we did at least one recirc after
> >reaching over 90%, finally hitting a 96.8% WG
> >approval.  With 802.16e, we did three WG recircs
> >after reaching 93.8%, ultimately reaching 100%
> >WG acceptance before requesting the EC to
> >forward the Draft for Sponsor Ballot.  Even with
> >that, the 802.16e Sponsor Ballot took about a
> >year, had 4 official recircs and some 4400
> >comments by the time we got above 90%,
> >ultimately closing out with 6 recircs and 98.5%
> >approval before sending it on to RevCom.
> >
> >As Phil said, they like the big numbers, but
> >sometimes it can take a long time to get thereŠ
> >
> >Brian
> >
> >
> >From: Phillip Barber [mailto:pbarber@broadbandmobiletech.com]
> >Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 6:19 PM
> >To: Peretz Feder; Gupta, Vivek G; Kiernan, Brian G.
> >Cc: STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> >Subject: Re: [802.21] Letter Ballot #1 Voting Reminder
> >
> >75%, yes. And I am sure Brian will correct me if
> >I am wrong, but I cannot remember an 802.16
> >Working Group Letter Ballot or Sponsor Ballot
> >that was forwarded to the next step in the
> >approval process with less than 96% approval. In
> >fact, it was/is very common for 802.16 to
> >recirculate documents several times even when
> >approval numbers are in the 90% range already.
> >16f re-circulated (in WG letter ballot) three
> >times after it already had a 93% approval rating.
> >
> >The 802 EC and the IEEE-SA love to see these
> >kind of approval numbers, especially with large
> >volumes of resolved comments. It demonstrates
> >that the relevant Working Group has given due
> >time and careful consideration in the
> >preparation of their standard, and gives great
> >comfort to approving parties (IEEE 802 EC,
> >Revcom, IEEE-SA Board) that an open and
> >inclusive process has achieved a broad consensus
> >document with substantial and diverse
> >participation.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Phillip Barber
> >Chief Scientist
> >Broadband Wireless Solutions
> >Huawei Technologies Co., LTD.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >
> >From: <mailto:pfeder@LUCENT.COM>Peretz Feder
> >To: <mailto:vivek.g.gupta@INTEL.COM>Gupta, Vivek G
> >Cc: <mailto:STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org>STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
> >Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 4:49 PM
> >Subject: Re: [802.21] Letter Ballot #1 Voting Reminder
> >
> >Vivek:
> >
> >As far as I remember, 802.16 approvals in the
> >letter ballot stage required 75% approval.
> >
> >Peretz Feder
> >