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

Re: [802SEC] Submission of P802.1s


To add to the confusion, let me mention the
RevCom "Early Consideration" process.  If
the recirc of P802.1s results in comments which
require changes or another recirc, then you could
issue such a recirc right after the Kauai meeting, and
still get it closed before the December RevCom
meeting, which may allow you to submit the
document for inclusion in the January, 2003
Early Consideration cycle.

The timing would be VERY tight, particularly since
the December RevCom meeting will be held
in Florida (away from the Standards Dept
headquarters).  From talking with David Ringle,
the submittal package would have to arrive
in Piscataway no later than December 4th.

So, if you want to keep the option of submitting
for early consideration open, you should alert
Angela, and keep her and Carol Bonfiglio informed.


Geoff Thompson wrote:

> Tony-
> So your plan is:?
>         1) If no new disapproves or draft changing comments
>                 Submit 11/1 for December with no new recirculation
>         2) If new disapproves or draft changing comments
>                 Submit for March REVCOM meeting
> There is no point to doing comment resolution at the November meeting 
> if you have submitted except in the VERY limited circumstances set 
> forth below.
> The Sponsor Ballot process requires that you "consider" all comments. 
> I would have to assume that the "consideration" of comments is not 
> serious if the session for doing that is not scheduled until after the 
> package is submitted to REVCOM. It would be arguable at REVCOM that 
> you were not following the process if you were to do that even if all 
> of the comments received were APPROVE/Editorial. The only way out that 
> you would have to argue against this point (and you should argue this) 
> is that the comment resolution meeting has the right to pull the 
> package from the REVCOM agenda if there is any comment resolution 
> which would change the draft or require an additional recirc.
> The only other appropriate draft changing "product" of the November 
> comment resolution meeting would be a list of changes that the 
> publications editor could "consider" during preparation for publication.
> The other method, of course, is that you could have a comment 
> resolution meeting between close of recirc and Nov.1.
> I 'spect you know all of this, but I figured it was a good opportunity 
> to keep things clear for all of the other WG Chairs.
> Geoff
> At 03:34 PM 10/9/2002 +0100, Tony Jeffree wrote:
>> At the last Plenary I was granted approval to submit P802.1s for 
>> Sponsor ballot. That ballot completed with no Disapprove votes, and a 
>> small number of minor technical and editorial comments. I have 
>> already requested a Sponsor recirculation ballot of P802.1s/D15 to 
>> confirm the small number of resultant changes; my expectation is that 
>> the recirculation will not throw up any additional problems, and will 
>> confirm the existing 100% approval rating.
>> Given the timing of the submission deadline for the December RevCom 
>> (1st November), I would if at all possible like to be able to submit 
>> P802.1s to RevCom in time to meet that deadline. Therefore, I would 
>> like to make the following SEC motion:
>> "SEC grants conditional approval for forwarding P802.1s/D15 to 
>> RevCom, under SEC Procedure 10".
>> Collateral information:
>> - Ballot of P802.1s/D14.1 closed 2002-09-09
>> - Voting tally: 23 Approve, 0 Disapprove, 3 Abstain
>> - No Disapprove comments or votes
>> - Confirmation ballot has been requested; ballot resolution (if 
>> needed) will be conducted during the Kauai meeting.
>> Regards,
>> Tony