| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear All, We have had extensive offline discussions
on this topic with Andrew. I am sympathetic to his cause. However, we posted the updated draft D8.0
on Dec-15 (as soon as the Editor had it ready). We started the ballot re-circulation on
Dec-20, since it took us a few days to extract comment resolutions from
Commentary file and update the spreadsheet on IEEE-SA website. The ballot now ends on Jan-9, just a few
days before Jan interim meeting. This gives 20 days for SB re-circulation
and 25 days from the day when updated draft was posted. This is the best we
could have done, given when the updated draft was ready. We checked with Bob Grow (Chair 802.3) and
others, and it is not uncommon to hold ballots during this time of the year. IEEE-SA website requires only 10 days for SB
re-circulation though many believe this should be at least 15 days. We are still going with 20 days for
re-circulation and 25 days since the draft has been available. Since the ballot did not meet 75% Approval
rating, the entire draft is in scope of re-circulation. The draft has been updated
based on comments and resolutions developed by WG. However in spite of the updates,
significant parts of the draft remain the same and hence it should take significantly
less time to review just the changes in draft as opposed to reviewing the entire draft as part of
original ballot. Andrew has been advocating that we should
start the ballot on Jan-7 and close 30 days later. This would clearly render
the Jan interim meeting relatively meaningless. From my limited experience of past ballots
(and Andrew agrees), 80% or more comments are submitted only in last few days
of ballot (irrespective of length of ballot). Also, I have been told that it is
inappropriate to try and resolve comments while the ballot is still open. According to Bob
Grow, such a project was submitted to RevCom recently,with contradictory
comment rebuttals and it seems that RevCom required an additional recirculation
because of it. The intent is to
make the Jan meeting useful and let the WG resolve comments. If there is
anything else that we can do, while helping the WG meet the above goal, please
do let us know. Kind Regards -Vivek From: Andrew Myles
(amyles) [mailto:amyles@cisco.com] G'day 802.21 SB pool members, The recirculation SB on D8.0 started on 20 Dec 07 and was
originally scheduled to complete on 6 Jan 08. Assuming most people took the
time off between Christmas and New Year, this gave voters at most 4 business
days to review a document that is 343 pages long, which is clearly
unreasonable. I protested to the Chair of 802.21 and suggested that a full
and proper review required significantly more time, particularly as the entire
document (all 343 pages) is open for review. I suggested that this
recirculation SB should be scheduled to take at least the same length of time
as an initial SB (30 days) because it is effectively equivalent in scope
to an initial SB. I was told that the rules only require a 15 days for
recirculation SBs regardless of whether the
initial SB ballot failed, the scope of the necessary review, or
the number of holidays in that time. I was also told that a longer ballot
was impractical because it would not allow comments to be resolved at the It is certainly within the letter of the rules to hold a 15
day recirculation SB. However, I assert it is not within the spirit of the
rules. The aim of the SB process is to encourage full and proper review by a
larger group than the WG members. A 15 day ballot over the Christmas/New Year
break fails to achieve this goal by providing insufficient time for review,
effectively disenfranchising many members of the Sponsor Pool. It would be convenient to resolve comments in The closing date of the recirculation SB on D8.0 has now been
extended to 9 Jan 08. This provides an additional three days of review.
However, I believe the effective review period of 7 business days is still
woefully inadequate for all the reasons articulated above. I would be interested in the views of 802.21 SB pool members
on this issue, particularly those members who are not voting members of the
802.21 WG. It would be useful for the purpose of closing the discussion quickly to
focus on the question of whether the recirculation SB on D8.0 be extended
to at least 30 days? Andrew Myles From: The closing date for this SB
re-circulation has been extended to 9-Jan-2008 11.59 PM ET. Kind Regards -Vivek From: Dear 802.21 Members, The 802.21 SB re-circulation has been
initiated with a start date of 20-Dec 2007 and an end date of 6-Jan-2008. Please update your votes and send in any
comments that you may have. We have a conference call on 8-Jan-2008 to
talk about comment resolution and next steps for Jan meeting in I would also like to take this opportunity
to wish you all Happy Holidays and thank you all for your participation and
contributions in IEEE 802.21. Kind Regards -Vivek Vivek Gupta Chair, IEEE 802.21 Intel Corporation Ph: 408 765 7766 (desk) 503 473 2456
(cell) Sent: Saturday,
December 15, 2007 7:18 PM An updated version of draft P802-21-D08-00 http://www.ieee802.org/21/private/Draft%20D08.00/P802-21-D8-0.pdf and an updated Commentary file 21-07-0340-07_SB_Comments http://www.ieee802.org/21/private/Draft%20D08.00/21-07-0340-07_SB_Comments.USR have been posted in the private area of the 802.21 web site. The draft has been updated based on comments that have been resolved, as part of Sponsor Ballot as per the above Commentary file. The updated draft will be placed in IEEE-SA area and SB re-circulation
would be initiated shortly. Best Regards -Vivek |