Re: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] EPoC Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc

[Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx>]

Steve, 

 

Thank you for the feedback. 

 

As a follow-up, attached please find the overview of the power-saving
mechanism in SIEPON. I would like to ask for a timeslot on the next week's
call as well as comments / requests for clarification on the email
reflector. Note that this material is an overview only, and will serve as
summary of the proposals for EPoC to be made in a separate slide deck. 

 

Regards

 

Marek

 

From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 30 January, 2013 6:03 PM
To: Marek Hajduczenia; STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Mark Laubach
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] EPoC Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad
Hoc

 

Marek,

 

               Sure, that would be fine.  Please tell me by next Tuesday if
you would like to present next Wednesday, and I can put you on the agenda.

 

               I agree that adding more Ad Hocs is not a good idea unless it
is something that is going to go on for a while.  If we can fit it into this
Ad Hoc I am fine with that.

 

Steve

 

From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 12:19 AM
To: Shellhammer, Steve; STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Mark Laubach
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] EPoC Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad
Hoc

 

Steve, 

 

Sorry for picking on you, but I'd like to ask the question about presenting
general-purpose materials. 

 

It has been pointed out that the Data Rate Adaptation (DRA) material was not
disseminated sufficiently prior to the meeting, and I'd like to  know
whether introduction material for this mechanism fits into the scope of this
ad-hoc. Same goes for power-saving - I have an introduction presentation I'd
like to share prior to March meeting and have it discussed on the phone.
Does this fit into the scope of your ad-hoc?

 

It would seem odd to me to have other new ad-hocs formed for these topics,
especially when they contain very focused material and do not need (I
believe) long technical consideration. However, I also see the need to have
calls devoted to dissemination and socialization of proposals, where people
could bring in material they plan to have discussed at the next meeting and
form consensus. Email is not always the best medium here, especially when
slides need additional discussion and revision. 

 

Thanks

 

Marek

 

From: Shellhammer, Steve [mailto:sshellha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, 30 January, 2013 1:13 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] EPoC Evaluation Criteria and Requirements Ad Hoc

 

All,

 

               This is a reminder that we have an Evaluation Criteria and
Requirements Ad Hoc call Wednesday at 7 AM Pacific Time (10 AM Eastern
Time).

 

               The bridge information is in the appointment that I sent out
previously.

 

               If anyone has a presentation for this meeting please notify
me.

 

               In my personal opinion we should try to close out this Ad Hoc
by March.  We have discussed a number of potential evaluation criteria and
requirement but have only selected a few.  I would like to see how we can
nail down the ones we really agree to by March.  Let's discuss tomorrow.

 

Agenda

.         Review IEEE-SA Patent Policy

o
https://development.standards.ieee.org/myproject/Public/mytools/mob/slideset
.pdf 

.         Attendance

.         Discuss Open Issues List

.         Other

 

Steve

 

 

  _____  


________________________________________________________________________

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1

Attachment: hajduczenia_01_0313 R02.pdf
Description: hajduczenia_01_0313 R02.pdf