Re: 802.5z, Link Aggregation Ballot
In view of the very low level of participation in the Working Group I would
appreciate the opportunity to revisit and review the validity of the "Broad
Market Potential" and "Distinct Identity" criteria at the March meeting.
Additionally, if there is not sufficient interest from multiple vendors to
satisfy the standards goal of providing multi-vendor interoperability I
would be hard pressed to support continuation.
At 12:21 PM 2/8/00 -0500, email@example.com wrote:
>All, the draft of the Token Ring Link Aggregation Draft Standard has passed
>working group ballot
>and is likely to be ready to proceed to LMSC ballot immediately following
> the March plenary meeting.
>I have heard comments questioning whether there is adequate reason to
> proceed with new 802.5 standards.
>Now is the time to assemble an LMSC sponsor pool for the Link Aggregation
> Draft. The words from the
>note announcing the voting summary to the IEEE 802.5 reflector is appended
>If you have any problem with continuing to process this standard draft
> through LMSC sponsor ballot, please
>speak up now and let's resolve the issue. If there is no objection, I will
> request the IEEE initiate the formation
>of an LMSC ballot pool for 802.5z. If there is discussion which is not
> resolved before the plenary meeting, we
>will need to resolve the issue at that time.
>Robert D. Love
>Program Manager, IBM ACS - US
>Chair IEEE 802.5 Token Ring Working Group
>500 Park Offices Phone: 919 543-2746
>P. O. Box 12195 CNPA/656 Fax: 419 715-0359
>Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
>All, Thank you for your review of 802.5z D1 the Token Ring Link Aggregation
>With just a single reminder there were more than enough votes sent in to
>successfully close the
>ballot within the announced balloting period. The Voting and ballot
>Vote: Name of Voting Member
>abst. Andy Fierman
>APP. Simon Harrison
>N/V Neil Jarvis
>abst. Ivar Jeppesen
>N/V Richard Knight
>abst. Bob Love
>APP/C John Messenger
>N/V Ivan Oakley
>APP. Karl Reinke
>APP. Bob Ross
>observers and ballots submitted after close of ballot period
>abst. Christian Thrysoe
>APP. Scott Valcourt
>abst. Neil Jarvis
>APP = Approve
>APP/C = Approve with Comments
>abst. = Abstain
>NO = Do Not Approve
>N/V = No Vote Received from voting member while the ballot period was
>Results: The ballot has successfully closed and passed with the following
>With 10 voting members, 70% voted (7 votes) during the ballot period (50%
> 4 Approve, 1 with comments
> 3 Abstained
>100% of YES/NO votes were Approve (75% threshhold required).
>The next step is to prepare responses to comments. Since John Messenger is
>charged with preparing
>those responses and is the only person to have commented on the ballot, I
>will ask that the following procedure be followed.
>John, please post a D1.1 with change bars, underscore, and crossthrough
>showing your comments.
>Once that is done, please send out a note that contains the url of the new
>draft and that lists all the changes
>and any explanation you believe will elucidate the reasons for the changes.
>All, if there are comments on the proposed changes we will initiate a
>comment resolution cycle with a BRG.
>In the absence of responses to John's proposed changes, we will commence a
>7 day recirculation ballot one
>week after the posting and announcing the availability of D1.1.
| Geoffrey O. Thompson |
| Chair IEEE 802.3 |
| Nortel Networks, Inc. M/S SC5-02 |
| 4401 Great America Parkway |
| P. O. Box 58185 |
| Santa Clara, CA 95052-8185 USA |
| Phone: +1 408 495 1339 |
| Fax: +1 408 495 5615 |
| E-Mail: email@example.com |
| Please see the IEEE 802.3 web page at |