RE: Proposal to move the SEC meeting to Friday
I'm afraid that considerations of how many Sundays are at stake don't cut
very much ice with me. 802 has always had a significant overseas
membership that has had little option but to travel at weekends in order
not to miss any of the meeting days. Over the best part of 2 decades I
have (at a very rough estimate) sacrificed 90 Saturdays and 45 Sundays of
my own family time to the cause of 802 standards development - and that is
ignoring time spent at interim meetings.
Of course, when it comes to choosing venues for meetings, considerations of
weekend travel always seem to go out of the window as soon as Hawaii is
mentioned; the US contingent rub their hands in glee at the opportunity for
a cheap vacation, and it is conveniently forgotten that for the European
attendees this can mean an extra day of travel in both directions, with the
added hassle of overnight stops, etc.
If we start from the standpoint of what is convenient & preferable for the
Exec, then we are in serious danger of letting the tail wag the dog. Our
primary focus has to be the needs for effective standards development.
Seems to me that the analysis runs as follows:
1. What are the needs in terms of Working Group time? It is very clear from
the Emails so far that, for some WGs, the current arrangement is not
providing enough meeting time to meet the demands of the work, and that
this is getting worse, not better.
2. Given 1), how is the week (or 2 weeks, or 3 weeks...) best organized in
order to allow the working groups to do the work they need to do? (taking
account of demands on meeting space, considerations of serial vs parallel
3. Given 2), how do we best organize the necessary evil of SEC meetings and
related Exec ad-hocs in a way that doesn't interfere too much with getting
the standards developed? (from my personal standpoint, these meetings
already encroach too much on my own involvement in WG activities, and
ideally I would like to see all such meetings arranged so that they do not
conflict with WG meeting time at all).
At 00:14 25/01/01 -0500, Roger B. Marks wrote:
>I am totally in favor of moving the closing SEC meeting to Friday morning.
>My main concern is that I would miss the post-SEC socialization, which has
>been my best opportunity to get to know the SEC members and learn some
>things. Maybe we could make a standing date for Thursday night!
>As for a Sunday SEC meeting, I am opposed to making that sacrifice. The
>current system (SEC meeting and optional Task Group meetings on Monday
>morning, followed by Working Group Plenaries on Monday afternoon) works
>fine for us [in fact, we use the same format at our interims]. I think a
>Sunday SEC would stress me and my family without paying big benefits to my
>Working Group. Don't forget that we hold a bunch of ad hocs on Sunday
>night; moving them any earlier would start making Sunday even more of a
>work day, which means leaving home even earlier on Sunday or, depending on
>location, maybe even Saturday. This won't work for me.
>I agree with Paul that an opening meeting is worthwhile.
>>The start-of-plenary SEC meeting should not be eliminated. There is no
>>substitute for a face-to-face meeting so that the SEC can all be well
>>prepared and coordinated for the upcoming plenary activities and to
>>optimally schedule our SEC meetings during the plenary. I am willing to
>>meet on Sunday evening, altough I would prefer to meet from 8pm to 10pm.
>>We can still have the informal SEC rules meeting 7pm-8pm.
>>At 01:31 PM 1/21/01 -0600, Jim Carlo wrote:
>>>1) I have no problem with moving the Thursday SEC meeting until Friday, say
>>>8am - noon. If we can discuss at our March Monday SEC meeting, then we can
>>>inform people of this intent at the Monday plenary.
>>>2) At this time, we usually hold an informal SEC rules meeting on Sunday
>>>3) I am somewhat negative on deleting the Monday morning SEC meeting. This
>>>is the first time that the SEC can get together and there are usually a few
>>>hot topics (where email will not work) and a few topics dealing with our
>>>meetings. One option, would be to hold the Monday SEC meeting on Sunday
>>>evening from 9pm - 11pm. But this might exhaust the SEC before the busy
>>>Jim Carlo(firstname.lastname@example.org) Cellular:1-214-693-1776 Voice&Fax:1-214-853-5274
>>>TI Fellow, Networking Standards at Texas Instruments
>>>Vice Chair, IEEE-SA Standards Board
>>>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Committee
>>>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
>>>Behalf Of Tony Jeffree
>>>Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 2:30 AM
>>>To: Howard Frazier
>>>Subject: Re: Proposal to move the SEC meeting to Friday
>>>You have my support.
>>>Might be worth considering removing the opening Exec meeting from Monday
>>>morning too - move the opening plenary to 9:00 and allow the WGs to start
>>>after the morning coffee break. Is there any good reason why Monday's Exec
>>>business couldn't be conducted ahead of time via Email?
>>>At 15:34 19/01/01 -0800, Howard Frazier wrote:
>>>>Dear members of the SEC,
>>>>I would like to enlist your support for moving the closing SEC meeting
>>>>from Thursday evening to Friday morning. This change would become
>>>>effective at the July, 2001 meeting of 802.
>>>>The rationale for the change is:
>>>>1) Working Groups need more time to conduct their business.
>>>>Moving the SEC meeting from Thursday evening to Friday morning would
>>>>allow WGs to meet until late in the day on Thursday if necessary.
>>>>While some Working Groups do this under the current schedule, others
>>>>find it difficult to conclude their business on Thursday afternoon and
>>>>then get ready for an SEC meeting on Thursday night.
>>>>2) SEC members would have more time to prepare for the meeting.
>>>>During my tenure as Recording Secretary, I have noticed that virtually
>>>>all of you could use more time to prepare for the SEC meeting, and I
>>>>think that this additional time for preparation would make the SEC meetings
>> >>much more effective, and much more efficient.
>>>>3) With the elimination of the Friday 802 closing plenary meeting, nothing
>>>>stands in our way except your consent, and the clean up work of changing
>>>>I understand that a rules change will be required in order to make this
>>>>change permanent. However, I believe that with the concurrence
>>>>of the SEC, we can announce the change in March, put the change into
>>>>effect in July, and ratify the rules change in due course, just as
>>>>we did with the elimination of the closing plenary. Specific rules change
>>>>text to deal with 126.96.36.199.3, and Procedure 5 Item 7 will be proposed
>>>>at the March meeting.
>>>>I ask your support for this change, in the hopes of making the IEEE 802
>>>>a more effective standards development committee.