Re: [802.21] Comment resolution effort
Michael, Peretz,
Officially appointing a core group to resolve comments is definitely not
allowed under the IEEE processes. All comments are submissions to
the WG, and so their resolutions have to be voted on by the WG (actually,
a quorum of the WG).
Michael is right that the group discussing the comment resolutions is a
(frequently small) subset of the overall WG. But the usual official
way to get this subset together is to hold teleconferences and/or interim
meetings. These meetings are open to all members -- though I have
yet to find one official interim meeting or teleconference that has a
quorum of the WG in it. So the resolutions that the group proposes
will still have to be voted on by the overall WG, but the vast majority
of the work is done by the subgroup.
On the other hand, any ad-hoc group can form itself and work out any
comment resolution proposals that it wants to forward to the overall
WG. And such an ad-hoc group can even make a call to all of the WG
members to join. But such an ad-hoc group isn't officially
constituted by the IEEE.
The most I've seen done in an official 802 meeting is for the WG or its
leaders to suggest that various ad-hoc groups (say, to work on Section 7,
Section 11, etc.) form themselves and work on comment resolution
proposals, to call for leaders of the various ad-hoc groups, and even to
recess during the normal meeting periods for the various ad-hoc groups to
work. If the ad-hoc groups choose to meet at the same time,
this automatically makes for much smaller comment resolution
groups.
For Peretz's midnight meeting, I suggest that it be located in a
bar. At least that way we'd have the feeling that we accomplished a
lot.
Hunter
At 01:07 AM 5/10/2006, Peretz Feder wrote:
Michael, sorry for the slow
response.
I object to the notion of creating a smaller core group to
handle the comment resolution process.
Please lets learn from 802.16d and 802.16e twelve or so recirculations
sessions, where each of these cycles had many more comments than we
have here didn't handle it in the fashion proposed here. The 802.16d/e
comment resolutions sessions/meetings went into the night (many times
midnight) but gave equal opportunity to all the participants to
contribute within the scheduled IEEE sessions.
Peretz Feder
On 5/5/2006 2:18 PM, Michael G. Williams wrote:
Colleagues,
Experience from past IEEE standards shows
that a core team of interested and available group members winds up doing
the bulk of comment resolution in some form of face to face meetings. If
the forum for the face to face meetings is the entire group meeting, then
others can monitor the progress but wind up not contributing as
much.
Once the core group is assembled either
explicitly or implicitly, it tends to define a schedule of its own to
press forward with the difficult work of comment resolution. It is
typically in the WG's best interest to support the core team in doing so.
This work often involves contacting the commenter in real time (over the
phone if they are not present) to discuss their comments and proposed
resolutions. (As an aside, in sponsor ballot many of the commenters would
not be attending the comment resolution meetings)
If we decide the core team is only
authorized to work in the context of the WG meeting, or if the WG meeting
is to be devoted to comment resolution, the approach I've seen that works
fastest is to partition the core team. Each sub-group works on an area of
functionality (or other way of organizing the chunk of comments to be
addressed) and develops resolutions in parallel.The resolutions are then
confirmed as acceptable to the commenter offline (but during the meeting)
and the agreed resolution *briefly* presented to the WG. The point is
that the approval/review of the entire WG (including the monitoring
folks) isn't needed to resolve the comment, as long as the commenter is
satisfied with the resolution. Then the recirc allows full review and
subsequent comment.
It would be good to build some consensus
around these issues in advance of the Florida meeting. It will save time
on process discussions, so we can focus on the standard content.
Best Regards,
Michael
From: ext Gupta, Vivek G
[
mailto:vivek.g.gupta@INTEL.COM]
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 10:24 AM
To:
STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: Telecon May 04
From: NJEDJOU Eric RD-RESA-REN
[
mailto:eric.njedjou@francetelecom.com]
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 8:21 AM
To: Gupta, Vivek G;
STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Telecon May 04
Thanx Vivek for providing a summary of the
comments. I guess your intent was to capture comments you deem are
absolutely to be dealt with during the Jacksonville meeting?
[Vivek G Gupta]
No, the intent was just to provide the
summary. The comments I tried to highlight were in my view the ones that
could take up a lot of discussion time and hence wanted to encourage
folks to submit Reply comments.
More generally, could we address technical
binding comments in priority inJacksonville and let other for telecons?
The intent behind would be to avoid the need of a June or August physical
meeting if possible
[Vivek G Gupta]
We can try to prioritize Technical
Binding comments though we have to resolve all comments sooner or later.
Teleconferences have generally not turned out to be a good way to resolve
things and achieve consensus. Also we do have a large number of comments
to resolve.
A F2F ad hoc may be the best way to
tackle this.
Adressing comments on a linear base
generally does not prove efficient.
Regards
Eric
De :
stds-802-21@ieee.org
[
mailto:stds-802-21@ieee.org] De la part de Gupta, Vivek G
Envoyé : jeudi 4 mai 2006 14:42
À :
STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
Objet : RE: Telecon May 04
Please refer to
21-06-0655-00-0000-LB1_Comment_Summary.ppt in May 2006 folder on 802.21
web site for further information for today’s telecon.
Best Regards
-Vivek
From:
stds-802-21@ieee.org
[
mailto:stds-802-21@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Gupta, Vivek G
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 6:30 PM
To:
STDS-802-21@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Telecon May 04
Last teleconference before May meeting:
Thursday May 04, 9 AM EST
Phone: 916-356-2663, Bridge: 1, Passcode:
3765295
Agenda:
- Comment Résolution Process (60
minutes)
Best Regards
-Vivek