Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [802SEC] +++ SEC EMAIL BALLOT +++ Get IEEE 802(tm) programrecommendation

I vote Disapprove.

 From the beginning, we have been encouraged to support this program 
in spite of a fuzzy definition of what it entailed. With time, some 
of the details have been other than what I expected; for example:

*a "3 year pilot program" interpreted as a one-year agreement
*standards pulled from the program because a new version is for sale
*the six month delay apparently turning into a seven-month delay

The current motion would leave the ambiguities (except the first one) 
in place. It would also introduce a new one, leaving uncertain the 
question of _which_ standards would be subject to 12 month holdback 
(all? all those published after May 15 2002? or something else?).

As for an extension of the 6 month holdback, I could support an 
extension to 12 months as long as it was dated from the approval, 
rather than publication, of the standard (to encourage IEEE to 
accelerate the slow publication process), and as long as there was a 
firm commitment that entry into the program wouldn't come a month (or 
even a day) late.

Overall, I have many concerns about this program. From the start, the 
discussions about it have been held close to the vest. I feel that 
the SEC has had insufficient access to what's really going on. I 
don't understand some of the fundamental principles of the plan. For 
instance, I don't see why the program should be expected to be 
"revenue neutral". Since it would result in major cost savings in 
terms of printing and fulfillment, it could result in much less 
revenue and still yield the same net.

In order for me to support a motion like this, I would want:

*the clock to start at the date of approval
*appropriate clarification of the ambiguities in the agreement
*a commitment to share information and reach agreement on the basis 
of the "Get IEEE 802" business model before the renewal year is over


>Dear SEC,
>This is an SEC email ballot on a recommendation to be made by the IEEE 802
>SEC to the IEEE-SA regarding the Get IEEE 802(tm) program as moved by Geoff
>Thompson, seconded by Bill Quackenbush.
>The email ballot opens on Friday April 26 9AM EDT and closes Friday May 3rd
>As a result of the extensive discussions between representatives of the SEC
>(Nikolich, Thompson, Frazier) and IEEE-SA staff (mostly Jerry Walker) and
>with some participation by Jim Carlo (who is on the BoG) I propose the
>following motion:
>802 SEC Motion
>Moved by:       Geoff Thompson, 1st Vice Chair
>Second by:      Bill Quackenbush
>That the following choice be offered to the IEEE-SA regarding the "Get IEEE
>802 (tm)" program:
>1) Extend the program as per the original agreement until the next annual
>review date (May 15, 2003). The following adjustment to the original terms
>would not negate this choice: Change of the new standard hold-back period
>from 6 months to 12 months.
>802 approves continuation of ongoing support for the program on a year by
>calendar year basis at the original rate of $75 per person per 802
>2) Terminate the program as of the annual review date (May 15, 2002). 802
>would cease payment of support funds.
>Paul Nikolich
>Chair, IEEE802 LAN/MAN Standards Project
>cell:    857.205.0050
>mail:   18 Bishops Lane, Lynnfield, MA 01940