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

FW: [802SEC] Ballot periods


When you said "Our P&P have screwed up because they narrowed the 
scope of a letter ballot" [so as not to apply to Sponsor Ballot], I 
wondered if you meant that we screwed up last year when we changed 
the language regarding WG Letter Ballots, including the duration. To 
check, I looked up the prior rules, and the situation was identical: 
no reference to Sponsor Ballot rules or durations.

I don't have any older rules, but I'll bet a steak dinner that the 
LMSC rules have never specified Sponsor Ballot durations since I've 
been coming to 802 meetings (i.e., since November 1998).


At 11:13 AM -0800 03/02/05, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>My profound apologies. In my zeal to protect the process I was 
>paying insufficient attention to courtesy.
>More appropriately...
>	1) It isn't the Balloting's job to determine balloting 
>periods, it is clearly ours.
>	2) I don't trust their judgement with respect to the defaults 
>they may throw at us on whatever basis they decide (unless they 
>quote chapter and verse of their P&P that over ride ours).
>RE your statement:
>>Under the status quo, I do not agree that we are in danger of 
>>ballots being overturned on appeal for following the Balloting 
>>Center defaults (29-30 days for a ballot and 9-10 for a recirc). 
>>Those defaults are in accordance with LMSC and IEEE-SA rules.
>Our rules currently say: "...for recirculation ballots, ..., the 
>response time shall be at least fifteen days."
>Our P&P have screwed up because they narrowed the scope of a letter 
>ballot to be that of a "Working Group Letter Ballot" instead of 
>having a procedure for "letter ballots" and then requiring Working 
>Groups (among others) to use it.
>Clearly the scope of LMSC is both Sponsor and Working Group Ballots 
>(ever since we became "self-sponsored" and broke away from TCCC 
>years ago). This shows up in our P&P in clause 1 paragraph 3
>The P802 Sponsor Executive Committee serves as the Executive 
>Committee for both the sponsor ballot groups as well as the 
>Standards Development Groups.  The standards sponsoring organization 
>is designated as the LAN MAN Standards Committee (LMSC) and includes 
>the Sponsor Executive Committee, a balloting pool for forming LMSC 
>Sponsor balloting groups, and a set of Standards Development Groups.
>3.1	Function
>  The function of the Executive Committee is to oversee the operation 
>of the LAN MAN Standards Committee in the following ways:
>j)	Oversee formation of sponsor ballot groups and sponsor ballot
>Clause 4
>  The LMSC Sponsor Ballots will be administered by the Executive 
>Committee in accordance with Section 5 of the IEEE Standards Manual 
>and Procedure 7 of these rules.
>There is, of course, no such thing as "the IEEE Standards Manual"
>The last one was published in 1992 (paper only).
>I do happen to have one, I could bring it to DFW.
>The IEEE Standards Manual clearly says its our job, not that of 
>Balloting. The IEEE Standards Manual does not mention balloting 
>periods except for something about 60 days for mandatory 
>It says, in part, (5.2) "The Sponsor is responsible for supervising 
>the standards project from inception to completion."
>In sum, since:
>1) It is our responsibility
>  2) We don't explicitly call out the periods for Sponsor Letter
>I believe that the (implicit) rule till we get things fixed is our 
>existing letter ballot procedures.
>We gotta fix the obsolete reference to "The IEEE Standards Manual" 
>in clause 4.
>Again, my apologies.
>At 09:54 PM 2/4/2003 -0700, Roger B. Marks wrote:
>>I object to your characterization of my position. I don't see a 
>>record of me saying "we should just defer to whatever staff decides 
>>to do". What I said is that the 802 rules do not specify a minimum 
>>duration for sponsor ballots or sponsor ballot recircs.
>>If we change the rules to specify minimum durations then, of 
>>course, we ought to make sure that the Balloting Center runs our 
>>ballots accordingly.
>>Under the status quo, I do not agree that we are in danger of 
>>ballots being overturned on appeal for following the Balloting 
>>Center defaults (29-30 days for a ballot and 9-10 for a recirc). 
>>Those defaults are in accordance with LMSC and IEEE-SA rules. [The 
>>IEEE-SA doesn't say much about this, although the Standards 
>>Companion says "Recirculations normally do not take the time that 
>>regular ballots do--most are only about 10 days in length."]
>>I would support an LMSC rules change to require minimum durations 
>>on sponsor ballots and recircs. 30 days and 10 days would be my 
>>At 4:06 PM -0800 03/02/04, Geoff Thompson wrote:
>>>I believe that we screwed up on this one. I thoroughly support 
>>>your effort. The SA staff is in no better shape than we are in 
>>>this area and remember that, in spite of VERY long standing 
>>>practice we had NO FOUNDATION WHATSOEVER in our OR/P&P for any 
>>>recirc to less than 30 days for the majority of the last 20 years.
>>>It is my position that Roger was incorrect when he said that we 
>>>should just defer to whatever staff decides to do. This is an area 
>>>where we could lose an appeal. I believe that the SA should be 
>>>providing balloting services to Sponsors under Sponsor rules. 
>>>Sponsors, in turn, are supposed to get their P&P approved by 
>>>AudCom. It is not a rigorous system. Paul ultimately is on the 
>>>hook for the decision.
>>>I would like to take him off the hook...
>>>         ...assure that there is adequate time for review
>>>         ...and remove any uncertainty regarding our system.
>>>My position will be that, with an underlying rationale to see that 
>>>the ballot is in hand for at least 10 days, our rules need to say 
>>>that all 802 ballot (i.e. Working Group and LMSC) recirculations 
>>>will be at least 15 days from the timestamp of the announcing 
>>>e-mail until the close of ballot.
>>>Thanks for grabbing the ball on this.
>>>At 12:41 PM 1/24/2003 -0800, Grow, Bob wrote:
>>>>This is to inform you that I intend to propose a rules change to 
>>>>enforce minimum ballot periods for our Sponsor ballots.  I also 
>>>>intend to raise the issue of ballot periods to ProCom for all SA 
>>>>ballots.  It is now clear to me that the ballot center does not 
>>>>enforce any particular ballot period.  (I also can't find any 
>>>>rules/P&P that requires them to enforce any arbitrary minimum.) 
>>>>I believe the ballot center operates to a default -- the ballot 
>>>>being open for some period of time on 10 dates in the US eastern 
>>>>time zone (probably restricted by the announcement being sent 
>>>>during their working hours).  In an exchange trying to determine 
>>>>how the ballot center counted "days", I postulate what I thought 
>>>>was a theoretical question asking if the period would be have to 
>>>>be 10 days (i.e., 10 * 24 hours) or only 10 calendar dates.  At 
>>>>the time the question was posed, I thought the ballot center was 
>>>>enforcing a minimum ballot period  what I got in response was an 
>>>>offer for a SB recirculation period a day shorter (i.e., 
>>>>I just received a particularly onerous example of what is being 
>>>>allowed by the ballot center.  I received the announcement 
>>>>slightly before noon Pacific Time.  The ballot closes on February 
>>>>2 at 11:59 pm EST.
>>>>So, for me, I have 9.375 days to respond (and four of those days 
>>>>are on a weekend).  For many international participants, they 
>>>>realistically will have much less time with this ballot (many 
>>>>won't see the announcement until their Monday morning).  If one 
>>>>or two of you would like to review my proposed rules change text 
>>>>prior to distribution to the SEC I would appreciate a response.
>>>>Bob Grow
>>>>Chair, IEEE 802.3 Working Group